PLEASE VOTE FOR ISSUE 2 AND KEEP OUR LIVESTOCK FARMING IN THE HANDS OF OUR OHIO FARMERS! 

Hopefully, those of you in Ohio will read this in time to vote tomorrow for ISSUE 2. ISSUE 2 puts our Ohio farmers in control of livestock farming in our state rather than have the animal rightists like the Humane Society of the United States (a national organization promoting itself from donations and not doing anything for the welfare of animals) and Peta (determined to end the “enslavement” of companion animals and livestock)  interfere with farming in our state.  When Proposition 2 passed in California, non farmers and animal rightists came in with  regulations that crippled the farming of livestock causing many farmers to leave the state rather than try to change farming methods that would ruin them financially.  Livestock should be raised and slaughtered humanely. Farmers should be in charge of regulating humane standards in which livestock are raised. 

PLEASE VOTE FOR ISSUE 2 AND KEEP OUR LIVESTOCK FARMING IN THE HANDS OF OUR OHIO FARMERS! 

KEEP UP THE FIGHT!!!  HSUS AND PETA ARE SHOVING THEIR AGENDAS DONE OUR COLLECTIVE THROATS.  WE DO HAVE RIGHTS!  READ BELOW:

A SAOVA message to sportsmen, pet owners and farmers concerned  about protecting their traditions, avocations and livelihoods from anti-hunting, anti-breeding, animal guardianship advocates. Forwarding and cross posting, with attribution, encouraged.
The following article from award-winning outdoor writer, Marc Folco, is well worth reading.  As an additional comment to the writer’s mention of HSUS anti-breeder legislation in the guise of eliminating puppy mills: HSUS is currently losing this state-level battle about 3 to 1; however bills are still pending in 8 states.
Susan Wolf
Sportsmen’s and Animal Owners’ Voting Alliance – http://saova.org
Issue lobbying and working to identify and elect supportive legislators

Open Season: Firing back at the critics

June 21, 2009 6:00 AM

I get hate mail on the average of once a week, and I don’t know why. My column shouldn’t be controversial.
Hunting has been around since the caveman, and guns have been around shortly after the Chinese invented gunpowder — and our Constitution clearly states that U.S. citizens have the right to keep and bear arms if they so choose. So, hunting and owning guns are two of America’s oldest and most time-honored traditions.

Why make them — and my column — a controversy?

After 21 years of dealing with cry-baby anti-hunters and runny-nosed gun-grabbers that whine incessantly about my column, the outdoors lifestyle and the shooting sports, I’ve become thick-skinned. Their barbs don’t penetrate. Some hate mail I answer, some I don’t. Some I answer here.

The Humane Society of the United States (HSUS), based in Washington, threw another of its hissy-fits recently because I wrote about how the wealthy animal rights group has been investigated after soliciting donations to reunite pets with their owners during the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. They took in $34 million for that purpose but only spent $7 million on it. So, a whopping $27 million of solicited funds were used for something else.

In his letter to the editor, HSUS’s Michael Markarian skirts that issue and also avoids the notion that the group is pushing to get 41 dog bills enacted in 26 states that are cloaked as eliminating puppy mills, but go to the extreme, as usual. Language in such bills has included mandatory spaying/neutering (or pay $500 per dog per year that is not spayed or neutered), reporting all puppy sales to local authorities and eliminating the practice of humane tethering.

Markarian uses diversion, and says that the group campaigns vigorously against abusive hunting practices. They also (falsely) claim that I defend inhumane practices. Inhumane? By whose standards? Those of animal rights extremists? By their standards, all hunting is inhumane and the group’s underlying agenda is to eliminate all hunting.

HSUS President and CEO Wayne Pacelle has been quoted as saying, “If we could shut down all sport hunting in a moment, we would,” as quoted by the Associated Press in Impassioned Agitator, Dec. 30, 1991. “Our goal is to get sport hunting in the same category as cock fighting and dog fighting,” as quoted in the Bozeman Daily Chronicle, Oct. 8, 1991. And, “Sport hunting — the killing of wild animals as recreation — is fundamentally at odds with the values of a humane, just and caring society,” HSUS Website 2003.

And according to a report from the U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance (USSA), Pacelle recently criticized in his blog, those who disagree with the group’s agenda, practically accusing them of not being in step with American culture, the report says.

Pacelle suggests that HSUS opponents should, “start adjusting to the evolving ethos in American culture. You’ll get ahead through innovation and adaptation, not stubborn adherence to custom or current business operations.” He also stated that other animal rights groups, “miss the bigger picture, and our interest in reaching mainstream Americans.”

“Mr. Pacelle’s own words pull the curtain back and unveil the real intent of the HSUS,” stated USSA President and CEO Bud Pidgeon. “He admits to attempting to ‘mainstream’ the group — at the same time he criticizes ‘custom.’ There’s only one reason to do this and that is to fundamentally change America to correspond to the HSUS agenda.”

The HSUS is also involved in a lawsuit to stop the delisting of the gray wolf as an endangered species in the Great Lakes states, where the wolf has rebounded to thriving and healthy populations, far exceeding the goals that were established in order to remove it from the list. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service — under the both the Bush and Obama Administrations — has determined that the wolf numbers are more than sufficient for it to be delisted. But that’s not good enough for the HSUS and other animal rights groups that are spending money on the lawsuit.

Could it be that the money being donated by people who are duped into believing they are helping doggies and kitties, is being used by these groups to fund those expensive anti-hunting lawsuits which tie up the courts with nonsense? We already know that a lot of the money feathers the nests of high-paid executives at the top of these groups.
Without an animal rights agenda, they’re out of their quarter-million-dollar salaries and would be slinging tofu at a vegan joint. You want veggie fries with that?

Just this week, PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) is in an uproar because President Obama swatted a fly. So, is swatting a fly (or a mosquito) now considered inhumane and abusive by animal rights’ standards? Are we now to adhere to the animal rights doctrine that mainstream America does not swat dirty, disease-carrying insects?

I see the animal rights brigade as nothing more than a noisy band of half-baked control freaks, led like sheep by cunning executives interested only in job security, who want to dictate how we spend our leisure time, what we eat and how we raise our own private pets. If you don’t like hunting, don’t hunt.

If you don’t like meat, eat weeds. Don’t want puppies, get your dog spayed. But why are they trying to shove their ridiculous agendas down our throats and make controversy out of “truly mainstream” activities that have been “custom” for centuries? It’s a free country, and if I want to hunt, eat meat, raise a litter of puppies and stomp on a bug, I should be able to without worrying about those whiny breast-beaters trying to outlaw it all.

Another recent hate letter was from Floyd, who thought my story about feeling the effects of approaching 50 just plain stunk and he wrote, “Write a book and do an autograph session with your raccoon hat and western jacket. Your description of stink is nothing compared to your articles.”

Well written, Floyd, but I beat you to it. Already working on my book — a collection of short stories, my favorite stinky articles. Hey, I might even name it that. “My Favorite Stinky Articles, by Marc Folco.” It’s got a nice ring to it. And thanks for the idea of wearing a coonskin hat for the book signing. Don’t have a coonskin one though, so I’ll have to wear my full-length coyote hat, made from a coyote that I shot (I’ll let you pet it if you buy a book). I don’t have a western jacket either, so I hope my buckskins will do (I’ll let you play with the fringe if you buy a book).

And if my articles stink so badly, why read them? If I think a writer stinks, I’m not wasting my valuable time reading his/her putrid rubbish from start to finish. I already know that fresh pile of doggie poo the puppy left on the carpet is going to stink, so I’m not going to sniff it.

Another reader was irate because I won a couple of humor awards from the New England Outdoor Writers’ Assoc. for 2008.
“Only you would make a joke out of killing a small defenseless deer — and your ilk rewarded that story on top of it. You and your kind are callous and disgusting,” M.S. said in reference to my story about shooting “teacup whitetails,” one of the award-winners. M.S. went on to say, “You are the most politically incorrect writer I have ever read!”

Well, my stories have won more than a dozen New England and national writing awards (many of them first place), so maybe you’re the one who is lacking a sense of humor. Laughter is the best medicine. Have a dose. Aint we got fun! I do have to agree with one thing. You hit the nail on the head — I am politically incorrect. And proud of it.

I am a man who tells it like it is, whether readers like it or not. I don’t write by anybody’s standards except my own, and those of the newspaper of course, where I can’t slander or use profanity. I wear my heart on my sleeve and say what I feel and think. Anybody who cowers to political correctness is a rump-smoocher in my book.

The end of “My Way,” as sung by Frank Sinatra, says it nicely:

“For what is a man?
What has he got?
If not himself
Then he has not
To say the things he truly feels
And not the words of one who kneels
The record shows
I took the blows
And did it my way.”

Marc Folco is the outdoor writer for The Standard Times. Contact him at openseason1988@aol.com
http://www.southcoasttoday.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090621/SPORTS/906210384/-1/NEWSMAP

http://tinyurl.com/ns7blw

The message above was posted to West Virginia, Ohio, Michigan, Indiana, Illinois, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa and Missouri residents by the Sportsmen’s and Animal Owners’ Voting Alliance (SAOVA) on one of ten regional read only elists.

SAOVA is a nonpartisan volunteer group working to protect Americans from the legislative and political threats of radical animal rightists. It is the only national organization fighting this struggle for both sportsmen and animal owners, natural allies, in these arenas. Visit our website at http://saova.org for this program’s goals, methodology and list signup details.

Pet Owners and Breeders in N. Carolina read below and contact your legislators (listed below) if you want to keep the right to breed and own dogs. THIS IS SERIOUS

NC ALERT: Strict Breeder Bill To Be Heard On Tuesday, June 30!
[Friday, June 26, 2009]
Senate Bill 460, a bill which regulates breeders and infringes on the rights
of responsible dog owners, will be heard in the Senate Finance Committee on
Tuesday, June 30.

All responsible dog breeders and owners in North Carolina are encouraged to
attend the hearing on Tuesday in opposition to the bill. We need to show
strong opposition to SB 460. While attendees will not be able to speak in
opposition, NUMBERS MATTER! If you are unable to attend, please call or
e-mail the members of the committee and ask them to oppose SB 460.

The American Kennel Club is appalled by the conditions in which some dogs
are kept and abhors animal cruelty. However, as the AKC wrote in a letter to
the Finance Committee, Senate Bill 460 is a costly, ineffective bill that
punishes responsible breeders and owners and does nothing to help the dogs
kept in deplorable conditions.

The AKC opposes several other provisions of Senate Bill 460, including:

  a.. A vague definition of commercial breeder. As amended, SB 460 defines
“commercial breeder” as anyone who owns or maintains at least 15 intact
females of any age for the primary purpose of the sale of the offspring.
This definition could include anyone who has bred even a single litter of
puppies, including fanciers and show breeders.
  b.. Inspections of private property at any time. The bill allows law
enforcement and local animal control to search the homes and private
property of anyone who falls under the definition of “commercial breeder” at
any time of day or night.
  c.. Directive for the NC Department of Agriculture to develop standards of
care with no public input. SB 460 calls for the Department of Agriculture to
develop care and condition policies for dogs belonging to commercial
breeders. This does not allow for any input from dog breeders and others who
are experts in animal care.
This bill is unnecessary, as North Carolina already has laws that address
animal cruelty and mistreatment. Senate Bill 460 will do nothing to address
irresponsible breeding and will cost the state over $400,000 a year to
enforce. At a time when the state is facing a projected $3 billion budget
gap, improved enforcement of existing laws would be a better use of North
Carolina taxpayers’ money.

How You Can Help:

·         Attend the Senate Finance Committee hearing on Tuesday, June 30.
The details are as follows:

Date: Tuesday, June 30, 2009
Time: 1:00 p.m.
Location: North Carolina Legislative Office Building
Room 544
16 W. Jones Street
Raleigh, North Carolina

  a.. Contact the members of the Senate Finance Committee TODAY. Tell the
members of the committee that you oppose this bill, and urge them to oppose
Senate Bill 460. A phone call would be most effective. E-mail is acceptable,
but we ask that you also call.
Click here for basic phone scripts for breeders and fanciers.

The contact information for the committee is as follows:

Senator David Hoyle (Co-Chairman)
Phone: (919) 733-5734
E-mail: David.Hoyle@ncleg.net

Senator Daniel Clodfelter (Co-Chairman)
Phone: (919) 715-8331
E-mail: Daniel.Clodfelter@ncleg.net

Senator Clark Jenkins (Co-Chairman)
Phone: (919) 715-3040
E-mail: Clark.Jenkins@ncleg.net

Senator Larry Shaw (Vice-Chairman)
Phone: (919) 733-9349
E-mail: Larry.Shaw@ncleg.net

Senator Fletcher Hartsell, Jr. (Vice-Chairman)
Phone: (919) 733-7223
E-mail: Fletcher.Hartsell@ncleg.net

Senator Charles Albertson
Phone: (919) 733-5705
E-mail: Charlie.Albertson@ncleg.net

Senator Austin Allran
Phone: (919) 733-5876
E-mail: Austin.Allran@ncleg.net

Senator Tom Apodaca
Phone: (919) 733-5745
E-mail: Tom.Apodaca@ncleg.net

Senator Bob Atwater
Phone: (919) 715-3036
E-mail: Bob.Atwater@ncleg.net

Senator Philip Berger
Phone: (919) 733-5708
E-mail: Phil.Berger@ncleg.net

Senator Charlie Dannelly
Phone: (919) 733-5955
E-mail: Charlie.Dannelly@ncleg.net

Senator Eleanor Kinnaird
Phone: (919) 733-5804
E-mail: Ellie.Kinnaird@ncleg.net

Senator Floyd McKissick, Jr.
Phone: (919) 733-4599
E-mail: Floyd.McKissick@ncleg.net

Senator Joe Sam Queen
Phone: (919) 733-3460
E-mail: Joe.Queen@ncleg.net

Senator David Rouzer
Phone: (919)733-5748
E-mail: David.Rouzer@ncleg.net

Senator R.C. Soles, Jr.
Phone: (919) 733-5963
E-mail: RC.Soles@ncleg.net

Senator Harris Blake
Phone: (919) 733-4809
E-mail: Harris.Blake@ncleg.net

Senator Julia Boseman
Phone: (919) 715-2525
E-mail: Julia.Boseman@ncleg.net

Senator Andrew Brock
Phone: (919) 715-0690
E-mail: Andrew.Brock@ncleg.net

Senator Harry Brown
Phone: (919) 715-3034
E-mail: Harry.Brown@ncleg.net

Senator Don East
Phone: (919) 733-5743
E-mail: Don.East@ncleg.net

Senator Tony Foriest
Phone: (919) 301-1446
E-mail: Tony.Foriest@ncleg.net

Senator Linda Garrou
Phone: (919) 733-5620
E-mail: Linda.Garrou@ncleg.net

Senator Eddie Goodall
Phone: (919) 733-7659
E-mail: Eddie.Goodall@ncleg.net

Senator Steve Goss
Phone: (919) 733-5742
E-mail: Steve.Goss@ncleg.net

Senator Neal Hunt
Phone: (919) 733-5850
E-mail: Neal.Hunt@ncleg.net

Senator Martin Nesbitt, Jr.
Phone: (919) 715-3001
E-mail: Martin.Nesbitt@ncleg.net

Senator Jean Preston
Phone: (919) 733-5706
E-mail: Jean.Preston@ncleg.net

Senator William Purcell
Phone: (919) 733-5953
E-mail: William.Purcell@ncleg.net

Senator Tony Rand
Phone: (919) 733-9892
E-mail: Tony.Rand@ncleg.net

Senator Bob Rucho
Phone: (919) 733-5655
E-mail: Bob.Rucho@ncleg.net

Senator Josh Stein
Phone: (919)715-6400
E-mail: Josh.Stein@ncleg.net

Senator Richard Stevens
Phone: (919) 733-5653
E-mail: Richard.Stevens@ncleg.net

Senator A.B. Swindell
Phone: (919) 715-3030
E-mail: AB.Swindell@ncleg.net

Senator Jerry Tillman
Phone: (919) 733-5870
E-mail: Jerry.Tillman@ncleg.net

Senator David Weinstein
Phone: (919) 733-5651
E-mail: David.Weinstein@ncleg.net

Senator Dan Blue
Phone: (919) 833-1931
E-mail: Dan.Blue@ncleg.net

For more information, contact AKC’s Government Relations Department at (919)
816-3720; or e-mail doglaw@akc.org.

 

FAX OR CALL THE LEGISLATORS LISTED BELOW AFTER YOU READ THE FOLLOWING WRITTEN BY JOHN YATES OF THE AMERICAN SPORTING DOG ALLIANCE.  HELP US FIGHT THE ANIMAL RIGHTISTS WHO WISH TO END DOG BREEDING AND ULTIMATELY DOG OWNERSHIP.

The Proposed Legislation Would Destroy   Almost Every Ohio Kennel

      Hearing Today – Act Now Or Lose It All

      by JOHN YATES
      American sporting Dog Alliance

http://www.americansportingdogalliance.org

      asda@csonline.net

      This report is archived at http://eaglerock814.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=general&thread=47

      COLUMBUS, OH – A critical committee hearing is scheduled for TODAY (June 24, 2009) on legislation that we believe would make it impossible for anyone to raise dogs in Ohio. The House Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee will take testimony on House Bill 124 beginning at 9:30 a.m. in Room 018 of the State Capitol Building. We have heard unofficial reports that testimony on another bill may push back the hearing on HB 124 until after Noon, but this cannot be confirmed officially.

      We cannot be too emphatic about the devastating nature of HB 124 and its impact on people who raise dogs in Ohio. It is very radical animal rights legislation straight from the heart of the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS), which is the political mouthpiece for this movement to gradually eliminate all animal ownership in America.

      If dog owners do not act decisively and in large numbers, they will have only themselves to blame if this terrible legislation is passed into law. Immediate action is required to save the dogs that you love. No excuse is good enough for failing to act now.

      Some people may think we are exaggerating and using scare tactics. We are not, and we will prove it in this report. First, we will summarize the major provisions in HB 124, and then we will provide a direct link to the actual text of this legislation so that people can read it for themselves and prove that everything we are saying is true.

      Ohio dog owners have every reason to be scared – very scared! And they have every reason to be very angry because this legislation denies innocent dog owners the basic rights and legal processes that are guaranteed to someone charged with murder or rape.

      You will no longer truly own your dogs if this legislation passes. They will become, in essence, wards of the state.

      Here are some of the major provisions of HB 124 and its companion bill, Senate Bill 95:

        a.. A Kennel Authority would be created to write regulations, administer the law and control virtually everything done by dog owners. The Authority’s politically appointed Board of Directors would be heavily weighted toward animal rights activists. Only one person who raises dogs and one person representing pet stores would be on the Board. There is no legislative or judicial oversight over the decisions of this board.

        a.. This committee would be given a free hand to design and implement all of the rules for kennel licensing, inspections and paperwork, as well as all construction, maintenance and management requirements..

        a.. The board will require every kennel owner and “any other person” who sells even one dog to obtain a tax vendor number. You must pay sales tax for selling even one dog or puppy.

        a.. Each applicant for any kind of kennel license will be subjected to a criminal background check by the state Attorney General.

        a.. Every license applicant must post insurance or a bond to cover the state’s cost of enforcing the law at the kennel.

        a.. The Board is given a completely blank check to write “any other requirements and procedures” to define and enforce the law. People with animal rights beliefs will have total control over the lives of dog owners.

        a.. Anyone who buys, offers to sell, sells or gives away nine or more dogs a year is intensely regulated and licensed as a dealer, which is called a “dog intermediary” in the legislation. Anyone who sells even one dog or puppy to a pet store also is considered a dealer.

        a.. Anyone who raises more than nine litters of puppies a year, or has 40 puppies a year, must be licensed as a “breeding kennel” and subject to extremely intense regulation. For some breeds, only four litters a year could produce 40 puppies. A “breeding dog” is defined as any dog that is not spayed or neutered, regardless of the dog’s actual purpose in a kennel.

        a.. Anyone from out of state who sells a dog or puppy to an Ohio resident must document the entire history of the dog, and provide a veterinary health certificate. This will make it very difficult for Ohioans to obtain a dog from another state.

        a.. Tail docking, ear cropping and dewclaw removal (or the removal of any other claw) can be done only by a veterinarian. Owners no longer could dock tails of newborn puppies, as has been standard practice for centuries. Owners also could be prosecuted if a dog accidentally rips off a claw, such as when hunting.

        a.. Kennel owners would no longer be allowed to treat even minor ailments or injuries, possibly even including parasites, which are now defined as a disease. All treatments must be done by a veterinarian.

        a.. No one can sell a dog at any public place, which would include field trials, dog shows and other canine gatherings. All sales must be at the kennel facility.

        a.. The state is required to inspect “any facility.upon request of a member of the public” or a public or quasi-public official. That means that animal rights activists can demand and get state inspections of the home and property of anyone who has dogs, without making or proving any allegation of a violation, and without producing proof of any kind. This will lead to continual and frightening harassment of law-abiding dogs owners by animal rights groups, and the state must respond to all requests for inspections, even if they are obviously bogus.

        a.. Inspectors are given absolute and incontestable power to enter and inspect “any public or private property” to see if a violation of the law has occurred. There is no requirement for a search warrant or probable cause (a warrant is an option method, but is not required). Anyone who refuses to allow an inspection, or hinders it, can be assessed for the entire cost to the state to investigate and prosecute, including wages and expenses for an unlimited number of state officials.

        a.. Any dog may be impounded if the state has probable cause to believe any violation of the law has occurred, but probable cause is not required to presented before a court, as is guaranteed by the Bill of Rights. A hearing before the state agency is set within five days, and the dogs could be permanently forfeited to face adoption or euthanasia. A dog owner cannot appeal to a local court, but can appeal only to the Environmental Division of the Franklin County Municipal Court, and the kennel owner must post a bond. The state agency thus becomes the cop, prosecutor, judge and jury.

        a.. Civil penalties ranging up to $15,000 can be imposed administratively (with no appeal) for violations, and separate penalties can be assigned for every dog in violation for every day it is in violation. Thus, a dog owner can be destroyed financially without ever getting his or her day in court, even for minor or accidental infractions.

        a.. The state “shall deny” a license to any person who has violated any part of the law or any rule, and that includes paperwork deficiencies, accidental mistakes and minor technical errors.

        a.. The state “shall deny” a license to anyone who “does not have the expertise or capacity to comply” with the law or regulations. That gives the state absolute power to judge the qualifications of anyone to own a dog, and no objective standards are defined. The decision is entirely subjective. There is no appeal. This also means that most poor and working class people could be denied licensure simply because they don’t have enough money to meet all of the state’s insatiable demands. This is a very real issue in today’s troubled economy, and Ohio is among the states hardest hit by the current deep recession.

        a.. No puppy under 12 weeks of age can be sold unless the litter is registered with the state. This essentially creates a database of every dog in Ohio, which many dog owners think will be used someday to mandate pet sterilization or ban certain breeds of dogs.

        a.. The law provides exacting specifications for kennel sizes, construction and temperature control, and allows the Board to create even more stringent regulations. These rules effectively prohibit a dog owner from raising puppies inside his or her own home, and also effectively ban outdoor housing in the winter for most breeds of dogs (it may exclude hunting and sled dogs, but there is some ambiguity in the language) if the water cannot be kept unfrozen 24 hours a day. The use of crates to train dogs kept in a home also is effectively banned.

        a.. Except for dogs that are continuously confined to a kennel, any dog that is found without a collar and license tag (even inside the owner’s home) can be seized, sold or killed. This would appear to include puppies, as the word “dog” is not defined.

        a.. No person or group who is licensed as a dog rescue would be allowed to breed any dogs or raise any puppies. This would destroy the breed rescue network in Ohio, as most of the participants actually raise the breed they are helping to rescue.

        a.. And reams of time-consuming paperwork and compliance documentations would be required, and minor omissions or errors could cause a license to be denied or revoked.

      It is the belief of the American Sporting Dog Alliance that the terms of HB 124 that are outlined above will combine to force almost every kennel in Ohio to close its doors. The combination of stringent rules, unreasonable liabilities and draconian enforcement measures will either result in kennels being closed by the state, or kennel owners being scared and intimidated into quitting to avoid the probability that the state would destroy their lives.

      Please do not take our word for it. We want you to read this legislation yourself and form your own conclusions.

      Here is a direct link to the actual text of HB 124: http://www.legislature.state.oh.us/bills.cfm?ID=128_HB_124 . Please read it.

      The American Sporting Dog Alliance regards this bill as an unconscionable perversion of the American concept of justice that shows utter disdain for the Bill of Rights, individual privacy or the concept of private property.

      What You Can Do About It

      Ohio dog owners are up against an array of powerful forces from the animal rights movement. They are well organized and well funded, and have been preparing for this legislation for many years.

      To stop this legislation will require an outpouring of clear opposition from several thousand Ohio dog owners, and the time for it to happen is now.

      If dog owners do not act in large numbers, there is a high probability that this terrible and destructive legislation will be passed into law.

      Please be scared. Please be angry. Please be scared and angry enough to fight back as if your life depends on it – and it does.

      Here is what you can do:

      Contact the chairman of the House Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee, Rep. John Domenick (D-95) and the Minority Chair, Rep. Jeff Wagner (R-81). Faxes and written letters are the best, but this should also include a phone call or email immediately, because the hearing is tomorrow. Emails alone probably are less effective, but far better than nothing.

      Here is contact information for Rep. Domenick:

      Address:
      77 S. High St
      12th Floor
      Columbus, OH 43215-6111
      Phone: (614) 466-3735
      Fax: (614) 719-6995
      Email: district95@ohr.state.oh.us

      Here is contact information for Rep. Wegner:

      Address:
      77 S. High St
      10th Floor
      Columbus, OH 43215-6111
      Phone: (614) 466-1374
      Fax: (614) 719-6981
      Email: district81@ohr.state.oh.us

From Bill Hembly, founder of PetPac:

HSUS raises and spends millions of dollars every year on the fight to take away our rights as pet owners. This ABC News story clearly documents (http://petpac.net/r/24457/13042/0) what were up against in our struggle to stop the anti-pet legislation they support. We know we can’t begin to match their money so we stretch the funds that you donate as far as we can. Once again we are asking for you to make a contribution so we can continue the daily battle. PetPAC has proved that in every instance where we have had an opportunity to expose the real truth we have stopped PETA and HSUS cold.

It is extremely important that we continue the effort to have our voices heard, sign the petition today and take the time let your elected officials know that we, who are pet owners, are responsible, productive members of our communities, and we want to preserve our right of animal ownership without interference from government.

Please got to the following link and click on the button for
“Stop HSUS”. 

    Please take 15 seconds out of your time to sign the PetPac
petition to President Obama stating that you don’t want PETA and the HSUS to speak for you & your rights as pet owners, breeders &
exhibitors.   If you have time please forward to other concerned “dog people”.

    PetPAC: Sign the Petitions! to President Obama telling him that we have our rights as pet owners, breeders and exhibitors.  Go to the PetPac Website:

http://www.petpac.net/tell/petitions/

    Please read the following link regarding the exposure of HSUS .
We need to make the animal community aware of this inappropriate
organization

    PetPAC: Story Exposing HSUS Buried: Read Transcript

<http://petpac.net/news/headlines/story_exposing_hsus_buried_read_transc
ript/> 

Bill Hemby

 

The National Alliance for Interests of Animals founded by Patty Strand had been on the forefront of fighting against the animal rights groups and anti dog ownership legislation for years. Another Organization called Pet Pac was formed to fight the legislation that was proposed in California last year; the bill was defeated but a new one has taken its place and has already passed the Senate in California.  A new bill in Ohio, worse than the one we defeated last year, has been introduced.  So many states and communities, so many attempts to end our rights to own pets.  Please do your part.  The billboard below is a great idea.  If we could all put one in our communities, we could surely make a statement.  Go to the following site and read more:   

http://www.exposeanimalrights.com/

If you wish to know how far our country has come from its original origins as a nation founded on belief in God and for the majority, belief in Christ, please look up the news story on the following link.  I realize fully that we are a pluralistic society with citizens of many faiths or lack of faith, put this news story happened at Georgetown University, A CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY, in Washington D.C. Have we who believe have no rights anymore?  Will every symbol of faith in God be removed lest we offend someone somewhere?  What has happened to us???

http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=46667   

 

I am also attaching an article written by me published in “The Royal Spaniels” this spring. 

 

HAVING MY SAY: “THE TAIL IS WAGGING THE DOG”

Meredith Johnson-Snyder

After a ten year retirement, I am back to work as a substitute principal in my old urban school system. Kids and the system have not changed much in the last ten years that I have had the freedom to travel chasing my Cavalier dream after retiring after so many years as a school principal. Why am I beginning an article in “The Royal Spaniels” by mentioning my former and now current again work? I am mentioning it because in my first conference with a parent, the parent tried to turn the conference around to blame me and the system for the child’s misbehavior. I had attempted to stop an emotionally disturbed young boy from running out of the school by putting my hands on his coat. The first thing the parent did was accuse me of putting my hands on her child while she refused to consider the child’s behavior. So many times in our society, the small minority of the guilty have gotten away with misbehavior or crime, by accusing the system of violating individual rights rather than apologizing for those acts against the majority of society. In my case the tail has never wagged this old bitch and I put the responsibility right back on the student without allowing the parent to put the school or me on trial for trying to uphold the rights of the rest of the student and staff population for a safe and orderly school. My point is that all to often in many areas of our lives, our society, our government, foreign governments and in our world in general, the desires, rights, or needs of the majority are cancelled out by very vocal minorities who wish to achieve their own agendas whether good for the majority or not. And we allow it to happen because we do not let our united voices be heard!

Take a look at recent past and current events in our country. The majority of Californians are outraged that tax money will be used to support the irresponsibility of the mother of octuplets who made a decision to use fertility treatments and multiple embryo transplants at the same time knowing full well that she could not be fiscally or medically responsible to take care of her six children much less eight more. The taxpayers of California and her fourteen children will pay the price for her own need to have “more children to love” without her considering the welfare of those children. One woman takes advantage of the system and the majority will pay as no one can or wants to deny the needs of her children and have given up trying to let their voices be heard.

Then we have the case of the border patrols in one of our Mexican border states where two of our border patrols shot at two fleeing drug dealing illegals, hitting them in their fleeing rears. So who gets in trouble? The two border patrols representing our government and doing their job go to prison while our government gets sued by the drug dealing criminals—another case of the majority sitting back and allowing injustice to rule. A couple of drug dealing tails certainly wagged the border patrol our legal system’s dogs.

Now to the news of the night which had me reaching for something to throw at the television. The United Nations is once more considering a resolution which would forbid the media from saying anything negative against Islam. Free speech is guaranteed by our Constitution; court battles rage over censorship in this country. Yet, the UN resolution would attempt to put a gag order on journalists or newscasters who might be critical of the Islam extremists who behind their religion to advance their agenda of hate and destruction—certainly not the agenda of Islam! To my knowledge, this resolution does not extend to other religions; it could still be open season on Catholicism, Evangelism, Judaism, and Voodoo to name a few. Atheism is of course still protected and continues to win the war against any kind of religion displays in government buildings, schools, newly minted coins, and, of course, public prayer and religious observances. Since in many Islam nations, religion and the government are the same, the possible UN resolution will thereby prohibit any criticism of Islam governments also. So a small number of nations will wag the UN tail and may get away with it despite what the too polite and politically correct majority may wish.

Now how does all my outraged rambling relate to our world of dogs? The tail in the way of the animal rights movement is definitely wagging the the body of the majority dog lovers and breeders who for some reason have little or no voice in protecting their rights to own and breed dogs. Will the majority do anything to fight back? They may win a battle or two, but are definitely losing against the political machines of the HSUS and PETA who are trampling over the rights of the rest of us.

As we all know, the world of purebred dogs is coming under attack. While we have concentrated on breeding and showing, animal rights groups have positioned themselves to eradicate purebred dogs and, in fact, all domesticated animals in several countries in the world, the UK and the United States being the top targets. Look at what has already happened in Switzerland; look at how fox hunting, a long tradition, has been eliminated in the UK. In the US, several communities and cities have passed breed specific legislation, restricted the number of dogs one can own, limited number of litters bred during a year or legislated no breeding at all, and put breeders under the jurisdiction of dog wardens who can enter a breeder’s home to check records without notice and seize dogs over trumped up charges without the breeder or dog owner having any way to get the dogs back. Every week, more proposed anti breeding and anti dog edicts come to our attention. This week, proposed legislation in Pennsylvania calls for the end of cropping and docking; an owner of a cropped or docked breed must be able to show at any time a certificate that a veterinarian performed the cropping or docking of their dog or face having the dog in question asked seized. New Hampshire has bad legislation in the works; California will be once more introducing mandatory spay/neuter legislation; West Palm Beach, Florida, has forbidden any breeding within its borders causing breeders to move elsewhere; Ohio, my state, will be introducing legislation to control and tax breeding in this new legislation session. The list goes on and on.

The public relations effort of the animal rights groups to demonize the breeders of purebred dogs and the dogs themselves is paying off. The public as well as many celebrities are extolling the virtues of shelter dogs as being healthier than purebreds, but who would really know as there are no health statistics being kept on mixed breeds and no mixed breed clubs tracking health problems. The unsuspecting public is duped into believing that buying a purebred will result in the death of a supposedly “healthier” shelter dog while shelters are sending dogs from one end of our country to another to fill empty shelters and importing puppies and dogs from other countries because in some parts of the country there are not enough shelter dogs to be adopted and shelters support themselves through adoptions. However, PETA and HSUS continue to specialize in successfully influencing public opinion against purebreds and breeders despite so many of us working to improve the lot of shelter dogs and pushing the neutering of the puppies we sell to pet homes.

There are so many anti breeding bills being proposed that one cannot keep up. The HSUS is now going after farmers in Ohio after their success of passing Proposition 2 in California. Farmers will not be able to operate as they have since our ancestors stopped being foragers and began to domesticate animals and grow food. Proposition 2 and the proposed Ohio Bill will drastically change the way farmers treat livestock. It is wrong to treat any animal inhumanely whether in care or slaughter, but animals are not humans as the HSUS would have us to believe. As long as we refuse to organize and fight back by docking (oh, my, did I use that awful red flag word?) all animal rights wagging tails, the interests of the purebred dog world will not be protected and all we may have left are the tails without the dogs.

 

It is great that President Obama chose a pure bred dog from a breeder for his family’s personal dog.  I am sure that the animal rightists will be attacking President Obama for his choice of a purebred just as they have blatantly attached Vice President Biden for choosing a German Shepherd from a breeder. The campaign of the HSUS that everytime one gets a purebred dog, it causes the death of a shelter dog is shameful.  With a purebred dog, one has an idea of development, temperament, personality, and possible genetic problems.  One has no idea with a shelter dog.  I have a rescue dog and would not trade him for the world.  I will certainly adopt another rescue dog when the time is right, but do not take away my right to chose to own purebreds!!! 

Since Proposition 2 passed in California, HSUS has now targeted Ohio as its next state to overturn traditional ways of livestock farming.  Have there been abusive situations of raising livestock, absolutely!  Should livestock be treated humanely and slaughtered humanely, absolutely.  Should livestock farming be targeted by those who know nothing about raising livestock with the intent of changing how we raise livestock, absolutely NOT!  Do you remember a couple of winters ago when Colorado cattle where starving in severe blizzards because the snow was too deep to get to grass?  The Governor of Colorado asked the HSUS to help with airlifts of hay to the starving cattle. The HSUS refused, responding better the cattle starve than be enslaved in ownership.  So much for caring about the welfare of animals. The HSUS, which by the way is not affiliated with local humane societies;  It is not the NATIONAL Humane Society.  It does nothing with animal welfare, just animal rights.

An update on what is going on right now in the country from the Sportsmen and Animal Owners Voting Alliance:

SAOVA message to sportsmen, pet owners and farmers concerned  about protecting their traditions, avocations and livelihoods from anti-hunting, anti-breeding, animal guardianship advocates. Forwarding and cross posting, with attribution, encouraged.
Prop2 Coming to Ohio; Rallying against animal rightist bills

Ohio cattlemen hear what’s hot: HSUS, OSU Extension cuts
by Susan Mykrantz, Farm and Dairy News Monday, April 6, 2009

ASHLAND, Ohio — Just when livestock producers are finding ways to clear the murky waters of low commodity prices and high input prices, comes another deluge of challenges in the form of steep funding cuts to the Ohio State University Extension and assaults from the Humane Society of the United States.

Producers are being targeted by groups determined to either change the way animal agriculture does business or put it out of business altogether, according to John Fitzpatrick, organization director for Ashland/Medina/Wayne County Farm Bureaus.

Following a preview of a multimedia presentation, Veal Calves and Cull Cows, Fitzpatrick told producers and industry representatives attending the Ashland County Cattlemen’s annual meeting that the Humane Society of the United States has targeted Ohio as their next state to pass legislation similar to Proposition 2 that was passed in California.

Fitzpatrick told the cattlemen that the HSUS is not connected with the local humane society in any way.

What you can do
All of agriculture needs to band together and tell its story to the public. “Don’t be afraid to speak up on behalf of agriculture,” he said. “You need to be willing to speak to the media, we all need to tell the same story.”

Full story at the link:
http://www.farmanddairy.com/news/ohio-cattlemen-hear-whats-hot-hsus-osu-extension-cuts/11659.html
http://tinyurl.com/d2pbzk

UPDATES ON CURRENT STATE LEGISLATION

ALABAMA
OPPOSE. SB 554 Sterilization of private dogs, cats required.
Requires the sterilization of all privately owned dogs and cats within the state with certain specified exceptions. This bill would also provide that the owner of a dog or cat over 6 months of age that has not been sterilized and that is the subject of a complaint to a local animal control agency, as specified, may be cited and, if cited, must pay a civil penalty to the local animal agency within 30 days.

Talking points:
* The proposed legislation allows for complaints from the general public to be included in the process toward mandated spay/neuter. Complaints can be for anything other than noise and do not need to be verified. The complaint-driven section is totally flawed.
* Spay/Neuter is an important medical decision that should be made for each individual pet only after careful consultation with the pet’s veterinarian, not mandated by the government
* Imposes state-mandated one-size-fits-all solution thereby removing any discretion from local officials, who know better than state officials how to handle problems in their community
* Exemptions for hunting, herding, detection or service dogs while working off their owner’s property are not included

Additional talking points are posted on the SAOVA website along with bill information, tracking, and contact information for Judiciary Committee members. http://saova.org/alabama.html

CALIFORNIA ACTION ALERT
OPPOSE. SB 250 Spaying and Neutering makes it illegal to own, keep or harbor a dog with intact sexual organs, except as specified. Makes it illegal to have an intact cat remain outdoors. Requires certificate of sterility as proof. Requires reporting of the sale of an unaltered cat or dog. Requires sterilization of any cat or dog impounded for any reason – even on first offense; or for violation of this law if cited for violation of other law.
A hearing is scheduled in Senate Local Government Committee for April 15, 2009 in Sacramento. Phone or fax your opposition now.
Committee Members:
Senator Patricia Wiggins, Chair
Phone: (916) 651-4002 Fax: (916) 323-6958 Senator.Wiggins@senate.ca.gov
Senator Dave Cox, Vice-Chair
Phone: (916) 651-4001 Fax: (916) 324-2680 Senator.Cox@senate.ca.gov
Senator Samuel Aanestad
Phone: (916) 651-4004 Fax: (916) 445-7750 Senator.Aanestad@senate.ca.gov
Senator Christine Kehoe
Phone: (916) 651-4039 Fax: (916) 327-2188 Senator.Kehoe@senate.ca.gov
Senator Lois Wolk Phone: 
(916) 651-4005 Fax:  (916) 323-2304 Senator.Wolk@senate.ca.gov

* Spay/Neuter is an important medical decision that should be made for each individual pet only after careful consultation with the pet’s veterinarian, not mandated by the government
* Imposes state-mandated one-size-fits-all solution thereby removing any discretion from local officials, who know better than state officials how to handle problems in their community
* Forced sterilization adds more costs to pet owners and already overburdened local governments.
* Areas which have passed this type of legislation have failed to see success in lessening animal abandonment

CALIFORNIA ACTION ALERT
OPPOSE. AB 241 Dogs and cats: breeders. AB 241 makes illegal to have more than a combined total of 50 dogs and cats with intact sexual organs. Authorizes certain officers to investigate a violation of such provisions, and to lawfully take possession of an animal kept in violation of existing law. Hearing scheduled April 14 in  Committee on Public Safety
http://www.assembly.ca.gov/acs/newcomframeset.asp?committee=57

Committee Fax (916) 319-3745
Jose Solorio, Chair (916) 319-2069 Assemblymember.solorio@assembly.ca.gov
Curt Hagman, Vice Chair (916) 319-2060 Assemblymember.Hagman@assembly.ca.gov
Warren Furutani (916) 319-2055 Assemblymember.Furutani@assembly.ca.gov
Danny Gilmore (916) 319-2030 Assemblymember.Gilmore@assembly.ca.gov
Jerry Hill (916) 319-2019 Assemblymember.Hill@assembly.ca.gov
Fiona Ma (916) 319-2012 Assemblymember.Ma@assembly.ca.gov
Nancy Skinner (916) 319-2014 Assemblymember.Skinner@assembly.ca.gov

MAINE ACTION ALERT
OPPOSE LD 964. Proposes unnecessary over-regulation of dog breeders establishing 3 categories of kennels with excessive kennel fees. The bill amends the definition of “breeding kennel” to specify that 5 or more female dogs capable of breeding are the threshold for needing a breeding kennel license. Adds new requirement that veterinarian must examine animal prior to sale. Creates a conditional license and fee before kennel license can be issued.  Allows the Department of Agriculture to charge a fee up to 50% of the kennel license for follow-up inspections.  Hearing is scheduled Apr 15, 2009, 0100PM by the Committee on Agriculture, Conservation and Forestry.  Contact the Committee: http://maine.gov/legis/house/jt_com/acf.htm.

ACTION NEEDED. LD 186 Possession of Animal Fighting Paraphernalia.
LD 186 is being heavily lobbied by HSUS and the animal rights forces in Maine. Criminal Justice Committee members discussed the merits of the bill.  Representative Hanley (D-Gardiner) and Representative Sykes (R-Harrison) both expressed serious reservations that this bill was attempting to solve a problem that didn’t exist.  Representative Hanley reported that according to the Department of Public Safety there have been no convictions for animal fighting in the state in more than 40 years, and only one report (never confirmed) of such activity.  

Senator Stan Gerzofsky (D- Brunswick), who is the Committee chair, then spoke.  He stated that as a former dog trainer he is very familiar with dog ownership, dog training and the sport of Schutzhund, as well as AKC standards governing these activities.  Many of the items that might otherwise be characterized as animal fighting paraphernalia are also appropriately used in training dogs.  While he finds dog fighting abhorrent, he noted that there are already laws in existence that can sufficiently address the issue.  Further, given his familiarity with the subject, he is adamantly opposed to any legislation that would in any way limit the lawful activities of dog trainers. The Committee vote was 9-2 Ought Not To Pass, with Senator Davis and Representative Schatz opposed. 

The animal rights movement in Maine has continued to lobby for the minority ought to pass amended bill.  LD 186 was presented to the House April 8 where the Ought Not To Pass Report was accepted by a vote of 122-20.  April 9 it was heard by the Senate; Senator Gerzofsky motioned to accept the majority Ought Not To Pass Report and Senator Nutting motioned to table the bill for further discussion.
What you can do:
Contact Senator Gerzofsky and support his stand on LD 186 Ought Not To Pass
http://www.mainesenate.org/gerzofsky/email.htm  Senate President’s Office: 207-287-1500

Contact Senator Nutting and express your concern about his continued support of LD 186. http://www.mainesenate.org/nutting/email.htm
Senate Democratic Office: 207-287-1515

Contact members of the Maine Senate and urge them to vote Ought Not To Pass. http://www.maine.gov/legis/senate/senators/email/maillst.htm

Find additional information at http://saova.org/Maine.html

VICTORY IN MINNESOTA: HF 253 defining as a commercial breeder anyone owning or having interest in 20 intact dogs has been tabled indefinitely.

VICTORY IN MONTANNA: HB 548 defining as commercial anyone selling 20 dogs annually has been defeated.

NORTH CAROLINA
OPPOSE. HB733/SB460 Regulate Commercial Dog Breeding.  Defines as Commercial Breeder anyone maintaining or having control of 15 intact females within a 12 month period.  The bills are based on numerous emotional assumptions that breeder/owners with 15 females are keeping them in crowded, unsanitary conditions for mass-production.  The bill also assumes that an owner of this number of dogs isn’t capable of managing a kennel and maintaining dogs in good health without state intervention. Mandates veterinary health certificate prior to breeding.  Mandates facilities, record keeping; allows inspection of kennel and private property.

OPPOSE. HB626/SB695 Restraining Of Dogs. Limits tethering to 9 hours in 24; exemption only while dogs are actively hunting or herding. Allows local government to reduce time limit.

OPPOSE. SB515/SB739 Prohibit Penning of Wildlife.  Will close fox pens in North Carolina. Eliminates safe training for hounds and eliminates the need for the many small businesses across the state of North Carolina that provide hound hunters with supplies.

For additional talking points, contact information and downloadable form letters visit http://www.saova.org/northcarolina.html

TENNESSEE ACTION ALERT:
OPPOSE. HB 386 introduced by Rep. Janis Sontany (D, Nashville) will classify a Commercial Breeder as any person who possesses or maintains twenty (20) or more adult female dogs in whole or in part for the purpose of the sale of their offspring as companion animals. HB 386 will allow the state to outsource some animal control work to HSUS or other outside animal organizations. The bill was passed by the House Subcommittee on Civil Practice & Procedure. Recommended for passage w/amendments – refer to: Judiciary Committee 4/7/2009. Voice Vote – Ayes Prevail Rep(s). Representatives Dennis and Kelsey requested to be recorded as voting No.  The Judiciary Committee is scheduled to hear HB 386 on 4/15.
Go to http://www.saova.org/Tennessee.html for Judiciary Committee contact information.

TEXAS
Texas dog owners have been exceptionally hard hit this year with animal rightist legislation.  RPOA Texas Outreach has all bills linked along with talking points.
http://www.rpoatexasoutreach.org/Texas_Bills_Filled_Summary.htm
Lone Star State American Pit Bull Terrier Club website also maintains a list of bills and update information: http://lsspbc.com/blog/2009/03/13/txbills/

VICTORY IN WEST VIRGINIA:  HB2843 defining as a commercial breeder anyone who maintains interest in 20 intact dogs did not pass out of committee before the April 1st deadline.

Watch the SAOVA website for continued updates.

Please share this message widely.

Susan Wolf
Sportsmen’s and Animal Owners’ Voting Alliance – http://saova.org
Issue lobbying and working to identify and elect supportive legislators

The message above was posted to West Virginia, Ohio, Michigan, Indiana, Illinois, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa and Missouri residents by the Sportsmen’s and Animal Owners’ Voting Alliance (SAOVA) on one of ten regional read only elists.

SAOVA is a nonpartisan volunteer group working to protect Americans from the legislative and political threats of radical animal rightists. It is the only national organization fighting this struggle for both sportsmen and animal owners, natural allies, in these arenas. Visit our website at http://saova.org for this program’s goals, methodology and list signup details.

 

Well, the battles are on!  Please do what you can in your state and your community to stop the spread of anti dog and anti breeding legislation.  Please pay close attention to what is going on in Washington as the animal rights groups now feel that they have a direct line to the new administration and are eagerly helping to form a legislative coalition to press the animal rights agenda. 

a small victory :

From the AKC website: http://www.akc.org/news/index.cfm?article_id782

Update: Mandatory Spay/Neuter Language Removed from Florida Bill! [Tuesday, March 24, 2009]

This morning, the Florida House Agriculture and Natural Resources Policy Committee adopted a “strike-all” amendment to House Bill 451, which would have required the mandatory spay/neuter of all dogs four months of age with little exception. The Florida Association of Kennel Clubs reports that the amendment, offered by HB 451’s sponsor, Representative Scott Randolph, has removed all mandatory spay/neuter language, and instead provides local government officials the option of using a $5 surcharge currently added to animal control citations to help pay for low-cost spay/neuter programs.The American Kennel Club commends the Florida Association of Kennel Clubs and the many concerned Florida residents who took action in opposition to the original version of HB 451. Their tireless efforts have ensured that the rights and liberties of responsible dog breeders and owners in Florida will continue to be honored. The American Kennel Club also thanks Representative Randolph for listening to the grave concerns of the AKC and the thousands of Floridians who expressed their strong opposition to mandatory spay/neuter. The AKC Government Relations Department is pleased to have assisted the Florida Association of Kennel Clubs by issuing several legislative alerts with contact information and sample letters; e-mailing thousands of AKC club members, officers, delegates, judges, and legislative liaisons; reporting developments to tens of thousands of alert recipients; and contacting legislators with anti-MSN policy arguments.

 

. . . And now the horrors of the proposed Texas bills.  Please send the following to anyone you know who can help defeat this legislation in Texas.  How has the tail began wagging the dog in the great state of Texas???

Forwarded with permission.

Texans need to pay attention here, and PLEASE send on to all persons, organizations, and clubs in Texas who might help in fighting these bills!

Around 15 dog / pet-related bills have been filed this legislative session. Zandra Anderson is an attorney who has worked with dog folks in Dallas and other locations, and who was a leader in the fight last legislative session. She is currently working on briefs against several of the proposed bills and is planning to testify in opposition to the bills. The bills currently in focus follow.

Mandatory Spay Neuter–HB 4277 / SB 1845 (all dogs and cats over 6 mos. old must be altered unless they are showed in competition or used for breeding;  intact permit of $300 per animal) The only people who are targeted by this law are those people who own and contain their dogs. Stray, un-owned dogs (and cats) that breed indiscriminately are fair game for local animal control to impound if they have at large laws. If there is a statewide edict that all dogs and cats have to be sterilized and the breeder bill will legislate responsible breeding to extinction, then where are we supposed to get our next pets? Perhaps we can start importing them even in greater numbers from outside the state.There are many valid reasons people have intact animals. In addition to show dogs, genetics is the key component in hunting dogs. Our state is known for hunting so this law adversely affects one of the state’s most popular sports.Working dogs, tracking dogs, guard dogs, search and rescue dogs are often kept intact to be able to continue a line of elite dogs in these various fields.

A statewide mandatory spay neuter law is misplaced. Any such laws should be entertained on a local level. What state agency will police whether or not our animals are altered? There are no state animal control officers, so there is no agency to enforce this law. This is a decision that should be left up to local governments. It would be an added expense to the state that is not discussed in any fiscal note and would be an astronomical expense considering that over 60% of Americans own a cat or a dog (American Pet Products Manufacturer’s Association–APPMA).·

Voluntary spay neuter initiatives are effective and over the past twenty-five years, altering pets has been on a significant rise. Currently, 75% of owned dogs and 87% of owned cats are altered (APPMA).Despite what humane organizations publicize about pet overpopulation when they are trying to drive donations, euthanasia has decreased over the last twenty-five years regardless that pet ownership has soared. The Tufts Center for Animals and Public Policy collected data indicating that in 1973 there were 65 million cats and dogs in the U.S. and that 13 million, or 20%, were euthanized. The Humane Society of the U.S. estimates that 3-4 million dogs and cats are euthanized in the country currently. As of last year, there were 163.1 million cats and dogs in our country (APPMA). Therefore, approximately 1.8% – 2.4% of cats and dogs are euthanized last year. Euthanasia rates are on the steady decline, so voluntary spay neuter initiatives are working and will continue to work particularly if low cost/no cost spay neuter is available.

More animals will die in shelters because many releasing agencies cannot afford to spay and neuter the animals they release.This bill will adversely affect animal control facilities being able to release intact dogs to rescue organizations despite the rescues willingness to alter the animals under their programs. The bill clearly states that the releasing agency cannot release an animal for adoption unless they are fixed, so a strict interpretation would not allow them to release intact animals to rescue. This will be devastating for the animals and shelters alike.

Only 10% of Americans obtain their pets from humane organizations or shelters (APPMA). Euthanasia rates in our state could be diminished if more people who wanted a pet could be convinced to get one from their local shelter or humane organization.No one wants to see even one healthy animal needlessly put down, but this bill will increase euthanasia rates. In every city that has tried mandatory spay neuter, the euthanasia rates have increased. Enforcement of mandatory spay neuter laws in cities that have them are usually prejudicially aimed at citizens who can least afford to fight back. Instead of unfairly going after economically disadvantaged citizens, why not offer them low cost or no cost spay neuter? Every time a spay neuter mobile unit goes into these areas, they are filled to capacity of people wanting to get their animals altered. People could use this help especially during these challenging economic times.

There is absolutely no reason the government should make it their business what an animal owner chooses to do with an owner’s animals. My dog, my choice. The government needs to quit micromanaging the lives of its citizens and their animals.

Breeder Bill–HB 3180/ SB 1910 (10 or less intact breeding females is a hobby breeder, 11 or more is a commercial breeder; includes hobby breeder as a dealer; harsh laws for dealers regarding the sale of puppies; has a lemon law for puppies.

This bill is convoluted to say the least. It is so complex that is not really enforceable. This bill seeks to allow the Department the right to have a vet, animal control or a humane society agent do the inspections of the breeder facilities. Animal control knows nothing about breeding. Humane societies know nothing about breeding. Putting people in charge of inspections who have no training or knowledge in breeding can be very problematic, and be ripe for abuse.

Humane societies should not be used by the government for these inspections. They are not governmental agencies and for the government to abdicate responsibility to some humane organization is giving way too much power to these groups. Many humane organizations have philosophies that are opposed to breeding, so then to allow them to do inspections of breeding facilities is unfair and ripe for abuse. To allow humane organizations to inspect the facilities creates the same conflict as exists in our cruelty seizures. The very humane organizations who are doing the investigating are the ones who will get the animals if they are seized from the breeder. This is like the wolves guarding the sheep and is fertile for abuse. Many times they are the same humane organizations who fight for mandatory spay neuter laws and who warn against buying from breeders. These are not the people you want investigating breeders who they are typically philosophically opposed to from the outset. The cruel conditions of a puppy mill cannot be condoned, but this bill is not really a puppy mill bill as touted. This bill affects all commercial breeders including the ones who do a good job (not puppy mills), and affects the hobby breeders regarding their sale of animals. Hobby breeders do not have their facility inspected per this bill, but they will have their sales scrutinized.·

Hobby breeders (those with ten or less intact females capable of breeding) are not the target of all the laws controlling a commercial breeder’s “facility.” However, they are included in the definition of a dealer which includes a person who is required to collect sales tax for sale of a puppy or kitten to the public.

There are onerous conditions placed on dealers under Subchapter G which addresses the retail sale of dogs or cats. This section applies to dealers which includes the hobby breeder. There is a requirement that dealers provide detailed disclosures about the animal being sold, a retention requirement of records pertaining to the animal, a requirement to deliver registration documents to purchaser, and requires a veterinarian examine the animal prior to sale. Dealers are subject to what are initially lemon laws for the sale of puppies and kittens. They have to essentially guarantee that the animal is free of genetic or hereditary problems, and is free from any health problems. These requirements are very complex and far reaching.

Dangerous Dog Bill–HB 1982 (makes your dog dangerous if he barks in your own yard and anyone says they are in fear; makes owners dogs 40# and more keep them in secure enclosures meant for Dangerous Dogs, no off lead)

Pit Bull Handling Bill– HB 925 (makes it illegal for anyone 15 or younger to handle or care for an APBT (American Pit Bull Terrier), AmStaff, Staffie Bull or any pit bull type dog, including mixes)

HB 2001 Tethering (would not allow your dog to be in your yard unless attended; no tethering allowed no matter how done)

 

 

 

 

Tonight HBO featured an expose of inhumane practices on a hog farm in Wayne County, Ohio.  It seems that an undercover investigator was hired by an association for Humane Farming (I cannot remember the exact name) to visit a large hog farm in Wayne County and document inhumane practices.  The videos shown of old or sick hogs being euthanized by hanging from a forklift after having a chain put around the neck and hoisted were awful.  The videos of the weaning of piglets being taken from the sows and literally thrown by a foot or an ear into holding tanks or vehicles were an assault to the emotions of animal lovers whether meat eaters or not.  The farm owners in question were put on trial for animal cruelty, but after testimony from veterinarians as to what constitutes animal cruelty as outlined by the law in euthanasia and in hog farming, the prosecutor only got one conviction and it was not on the euthanasia. Personally, I feel like the farmers in question needed to be hung from a forklift and slung by their ears. 

This trial has given the HSUS more ammunition in its animal rights agenda. The HSUS has infiltrated so many areas of animal husbandry, including farming and dog breeding.  While NO ONE wants to see cruelty of animals, the majority of Americans also do not want to be forced into becoming Vegans!  There must be a middle ground.  However, the practices of this one farm in Wayne County have opened the floodgates to the HSUS taking on the farm industry in Ohio without knowing much about farming and animal husbandry.  I repeat, no one wants to see farm animals abused in their lives or in the slaughtering for food, but the HSUS agenda is to eliminate the supposed enslavement of animals so that there will be no animals raised for meat, eggs, hides, or by products!  It will take a lot of lettuce and other vegetables and grains to feed the world without animal protein available. 

Following is a report that I received today about more HSUS activity:  (WRITE YOUR NATIONAL LEGISLATOR NOW ABOUT HOW YOU FEEL ABOUT HSUS PROMOTING ITS AGENDA SO BLATANTLY.

The Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) couldn’t be happier
with the formation of a new group of Congressmen that will promote its agenda.

On February 18, U.S. Representatives Jim Moran (D- VA) and Elton
Gallegy (R- CA) announced the formation of a new Congressional Animal Protection Caucus. The goal of the group is to get like-minded members of Congress together and promote animal rights policy in Washington, D.C. through forums and briefings.

According to the Humane Society Legislative Fund (HSLF), the
legislative wing of the HSUS, the new caucus will “take lawmaking for the animals to the next level.” HSLF went on to gush in its blog, “we could not be more excited about their leadership of this new
organization of humane lawmakers.”

HSUS President and CEO, Wayne Pacelle was also prominently quoted in Rep. Moran’s press release announcing the caucus’ formation.

Pacelle stated, “The newly constituted Congressional Animal Protection Caucus will help better align our federal policies with public opinion, and we are excited to work closely with its leaders and with the entire Congress to combat cruelty and abuse.”

As of press time, a full list of other U.S. Representatives joining
the caucus was not available. However, the USSA will let sportsmen
know as the names become available. Each member of the caucus should be contacted by constituents in their districts.

Representatives should be made aware of HSUS’ radical anti-hunting
agenda. They also need to be aware that sportsmen expect their
representatives not to kowtow to that agenda.

 

And from the the Sportsmen’s and Animal Owner’s Voting Alliance   www.saova.org 

UPDATE ON THE HSUS NATIONWIDE ASSAULT AGAINST DOG BREEDERS AND ANIMAL OWNERS. This may be long but read through the following to get an idea of national movements:

ILLINOIS

VICTORY in Chicago!! Ald. Ed Burke (D-14) found he did not have the votes he
thought were wrapped up for his mandatory spay/neuter bill and did not call
for a vote. According to the Chicago Tribune, Ald. Ray Suarez (31st)
appeared to oppose. “It really doesn’t make a lot of sense when you tell me
what a dog owner can do,” Suarez said. Ald. Ed Smith (28th) also said he was
opposed to it, after questioning how much it would do to prevent dog
attacks. “We’re on the wrong track,” he said.  An underlying sentiment of
many aldermen was frustration at being forced to spend so much time on this
item rather than critical issues such as crime, budgets, and the economy.
Congratulations to all the hardworking dog clubs and special thanks to Dr.
Shannon Greeley (CVMA), Dr. Rubin (ISVMA) and Steve Dale for their
unwavering support.

OPPOSE SB 53 / HB 198 Licensing Dog Breeder.  All information and bill links
can be found on the SAOVA website along with easy to use email tools.
http://www.saova.org/Illinois.html

SB 53 has been slightly amended eliminating the beginning point for
licensing of 3 intact females.  However, overly strict kennel standards,
excessive reporting, and unreasonable disclosures to purchasers remain.  The
bill has no merit and is flawed beyond repair.  SB 53 is scheduled to be
read for the 2nd time in Licensed Activities on March 17th.

SAOVA commends Senators Gary Dahl (R-38) and Chris Lauzen (R-25); and
Representatives Sandy Cole (R-62), Angelo Saviano (R-77), and Al Riley
(D-38) for removing themselves as cosponsors.

MAINE

HP 666, LD 964 An Act Pertaining to the Breeding and Selling of Dogs and
Cats, introduced by Representative Wendy Pieh (D-Bremen) 3/10 and referred
3/12 to the Committee on Agriculture, Conservation And Forestry and sent for
concurrence.

OPPOSE: HP 666, LD 964 is unnecessary over-regulation of dog breeders with
excessive kennel fees.  The bill amends the definition of “breeding kennel”
to specify that 5 or more female dogs capable of breeding are the threshold
for needing a breeding kennel license.

HP 666, LD 964 establishes 3 categories of breeding kennels:

A. A breeding kennel that maintains at least 5 but no more than 10 female
dogs or cats capable of breeding is a Category 1 breeding kennel. (Fee $75)

B. A breeding kennel that maintains at least 11 but no more than 20 female
dogs or cats capable of breeding is a Category 2 breeding kennel. (Fee $250)

C. A breeding kennel that maintains 21 or more female dogs or cats capable
of breeding is a Category 3 breeding kennel. (Fee $500)

HP 666, LD 964 creates “conditional licensing” for new applicants until
inspections are performed and the kennel passes to the satisfaction of the
state inspectors.  HP 666, LD 964 establishes fees for follow-up inspections
following an infraction. Should two or more follow-up inspections be needed
in any calendar year, the department shall charge the licensee a fee equal
to 50% of the original license fee for each follow-up inspection.  If
documents necessary for registration of a dog or cat with a pedigree
registry are not provided to the buyer within 60 days of sale, the buyer is
entitled to a refund of 50% of the sale price. It also adds a new
requirement that a veterinarian must examine animal prior to sale.

Full text of HP0666, LD 964 can be found here:
http://www.mainelegislature.org/legis/bills/display_ps.asp?LD=964
<http://www.mainelegislature.org/legis/bills/display_ps.asp?LD=964&snum=124>
&snum=124

Find Maine House Members here: http://www.maine.gov/legis/house/hbiolist.htm

Find Maine Senate Members here:
http://www.state.me.us/legis/senate/senators/index.htm

For more information go to http://saova.org/maine.html or contact Ann Short
jasbrittanys@comcast.net 

MARYLAND

VICTORY in Maryland for dog breeders! SB318 would have mandated rigid
engineering standards and detailed exercise regulations for anyone owning 10
or more intact dogs. The measure also would have limited breeders to owning
no more than 50 “breeding” dogs over the age of four months. The Maryland
Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee rejected this restrictive and costly
legislation.

NORTH CAROLINA

SB 515 Prohibit Penning Of Wildlife. Sponsor: Senator Neal Hunt (R-Wake).

OPPOSE SB 515:  The HSUS animal rights agenda does not need a platform in
North Carolina law.  Fox preserves are highly regulated by our NC Wildlife
Resources Commission, consist of hundreds of acres, and contain structures
in which the fox can hide. Hunters and their families can run and train the
dogs to perform what they have been bred to do for centuries. In typical
anti-hunting, animal rights fashion, HSUS is distributing propaganda that
penning is a bloody and barbaric sport. Amazingly, Sen. Hunt chose to
believe the HSUS spin and agreed to introduce legislation that will close
ALL fox pens in North Carolina.  SB 515 has been referred to the Senate
Committee on Agriculture/Environment/Natural Resources. 

ACTION REQUEST: Contact the Senate Ag Committee:
http://www.ncleg.net/gascripts/Committees/Committees.asp?sAction=ViewCommitt
ee
<http://www.ncleg.net/gascripts/Committees/Committees.asp?sAction=ViewCommit
tee&sActionDetails=Senate%20Standing_66>
&sActionDetails=Senate%20Standing_66

http://tinyurl.com/bzysyn

OPPOSE: SB 460 / HB 460 Commercial Dog Breeders; adds commercial breeder,
commercial breeding operations to SECTION 1 G.S. 19A-21 as a category along
with pet shops and boarding kennels for the purpose of licensing, regulation
and inspection. 
(5a) “Commercial breeder” means any person who, during any 12-month period,
maintains 15 or more adult female dogs for the primary purpose of the sale
of their offspring as companion animals.  (5b) “Commercial breeding
operation” means the physical location or facility at which a commercial
breeder breeds or maintains adult female dogs and their offspring.” It
mandates standards for care at commercial breeding operations, including
requirements for exercise, veterinary care and record keeping to be written
by the NC Department of Agriculture at a later date and adds annual
veterinary exam and certification for females before breeding.

ACTION REQUEST: Contact the Senate Commerce Committee:
http://www.ncleg.net/gascripts/Committees/Committees.asp?sAction=ViewCommitt
ee
<http://www.ncleg.net/gascripts/Committees/Committees.asp?sAction=ViewCommit
tee&sActionDetails=Senate%20Standing_67>
&sActionDetails=Senate%20Standing_67

http://tinyurl.com/dj9sqj

This is reactive legislation to the recent closure of a substandard kennel
in Wayne County widely publicized by HSUS. Closing of the kennel and removal
of the dogs is evidence that current law adequately dealt with the
situation.  State licensing and regulation as a commercial entity will end
dog breeding for anyone in a residential zoned area. The impact in
rural-residential zoned areas will depend on zoning ordinances already in
place for each county and the final requirements for housing established by
the NC Department of Agriculture.

The bills define as commercial anyone maintaining 15 females during the span
of 12 months; does not say intact females, does not define what age is
considered adult. The requirement for annual veterinary certification of
suitable health for breeding is very vague. Certification could require
anything from routine physical exam to an expensive panel of blood tests and
x-rays. There is no definition of suitable health for breeding. The bill
prohibits breeding females less than 18 months or more than 8 years. This is
a precursor for state mandated breeding restrictions.

More information and contacts here: http://www.saova.org/northcarolina.html

TENNESSEE

OPPOSE SB 258: Commercial Breeder Act

Find talking points and contact information here:
http://www.saova.org/Tennessee.html

Senate Bill 258, sponsored by Sen. Doug Jackson (D-25) and House Bill 386,
sponsored by Rep. Janis Baird Sontany (D-53) places breeding of purebred
dogs under criminal animal cruelty statutes. The bills classify a Commercial
breeder as any person who possesses or maintains twenty (20) or more adult
female dogs in whole or in part for the purpose of the sale of their
offspring as companion animals. If even one litter of puppies is produced, a
commercial breeder licensing would be required. Ownership of 75 is the
absolute limit.   Background checks will be required for applicants, and the
state will determine if the applicant is of good moral character and
deserving of the license.

HSUS State Director, Leighann McCollum, responding on behalf of Sen. Doug
Jackson confirmed that USDA regulations currently in effect under the Dog
and Cat Dealer Act (44-17-101) will be required for the new commercial
breeder kennels. Senate Bill 258 was referred to Senate Committee Commerce
Labor & Agriculture Feb. 19; no hearings are scheduled at this time.

TEXAS

HB 458 Pet Limits in Counties. Sponsored by Rep. David Lieberman (D-117).

OPPOSE: Allows counties to impose dog limit laws in unincorporated areas,
changing the rules on pet owners who have bought homes with no HOA or
dog-related deed restrictions.

ACTION REQUEST: HB 458 is scheduled for a hearing Monday, March 16th, 2 PM
in E2.016 at the State Capitol, Austin.  If you cannot attend the hearing
please call or fax. 

SB 634 Relating to the unlawful restraint of a dog. Sponsored by Sen. Ken
Seliger (R-31)

HB 2001 Companion bill Sponsored by Rep. Brian McCall (R-66)

OPPOSE: Would prohibit tethering under any condition, mandates 150 SF kennel
requirements, does not allow dogs to be outside unattended at all during
inclement weather (hunting dogs are not exempt). Requirements are
unreasonable for lower income and elderly dog owners and will result in
increased kill rates at shelters due to owner surrenders, or more dogs at
large and therefore dog bites.

SB 554 An act relating to conduct constituting the offense of dog fighting
and to the criminal and civil consequences of committing that offense;
sponsored by Sen. John Whitmire (D-15).

OPPOSE: Criminalizes the ownership of “dog fighting equipment,” with the
intent that the equipment be used to train a dog for fighting, including
items common to show and working dog owners: harness, treadmill, cage,
decoy, pen, house for keeping a dog, feeding apparatus or training pen.
Intent is difficult to prove and would likely be applied selectively based
on breed of dog.

ACTION REQUEST: SB 554 is scheduled for a hearing March 17th , 1:30 PM in
E1.016 (Hearing Room) State Capitol, Austin. If you cannot attend the
hearing please call or fax. 

SB 1845 Relating to the sterilization of dogs and cats; providing a penalty.
Sponsored by Sen. Leticia Van de Putte (D-26)

HB 4277 Identical bill by Rep. Jose Menendez (D-124)

OPPOSE: These are statewide mandatory spay/neuter bills for dogs and cats
over 6 months of age.

HB 3180 Relating to the licensing and regulation of commercial dog and cat
breeders and the regulation of dog and cat dealers; providing penalties.
Sponsored by Rep. Senfronio Thompson (D-81)

SB 1910 Identical bill sponsored by Sen. John Whitmire (D-15).

OPPOSE: Imposes excessive reporting; stringent kennel standards, grooming,
exercise, socialization, and breeding standards. Defines commercial breeder
as anyone who possesses 11 or more adult intact females; breeder may not
possess more than 50 at any time. 

Text of bills, summaries, contact information, action alerts can be found
at:

Lone Star State American Pit Bull Terrier Club
http://lsspbc.com/blog/2009/03/13/txbills/

Responsible Pet Owners Alliance www.rpoatexasoutreach.org
<http://www.rpoatexasoutreach.org/> 

Please share this message widely.

Susan Wolf

Sportsmen’s and Animal Owners’ Voting Alliance –  <http://saova.org>
http://saova.org
Issue lobbying and working to identify and elect supportive legislators

<