Insanity in New Hampshire

The New Hampshire legislation is among the most restrictive  anti-hobbyist bills we have ever seen. It was presented in the House Environment and Agriculture committee today for a hearing. Dog owners were not informed of the hearing, and the results have not been made available. The legislation is scheduled to move out of committee following an executive session on February 19.

      House Bill 337 would:

      · Allow New Hampshire residents to sell only one dog or cat a year.

      · Allow a maximum of no more than two additional sales by a special
      permit, for $25 apiece. No one could receive more than two special
      permits.

      · Impose fines of $50 to $200 would be imposed. All permit fee
      revenues and fines would be placed in a special fund for spaying and
      neutering pets.

      · Only large commercial kennels are exempt.(what is the definition
      and why can large kennels be approved over the hobby breeder?)

Here is a link to the actual text of the legislation:

http://www.gencourt .state.nh. us/legislation/ 2009/HB0337. html.
           

The American Sporting Dog Alliance is urging all New Hampshire dog owners to immediately contact each member of this committee and express strong opposition. It is critical to do this quickly, before the February 19 executive session.

Here is a link to the names of each member of the committee:

http://www.gencourt .state.nh. us/house/ committees/ committeedetails .aspx?code=H06
     
Clicking on a name will bring up a page with contact information for phone,surface mail, fax and email.

            PLEASE CROSS-POST AND FORWARD THIS REPORT TO YOUR FRIENDS

 

Thank you to all who have called, emailed, or sent cards during my husband’s surgery.  Al continues to improve.  He came home Monday night and immediately began to bring in firewood from the front porch then told me to stop “harping” at him when I went ballistic.  He insists on driving which, of course, I will not let him do. He gets even by front seat passenger driving and nagging me with every turn I take until I am ready to drop him off in the middle of the interstate.   He is back to normal and I am grateful, not for the return of his curmudgeon attitude, but that he is well enough to be himself!

Legislation

With the new legislative year, anti breeding legislation is cropping up in several states with more proposed bills on their way. The Animal rights activists are on the move. HSUS and PETA feel that they have an “in” with President Obama as Ophra, Peta’s person of the year, certainly does have in with our new president.  The campaign to disillusion the public from buying a purebred from a breeder and to go to a shelter to get a pet continues to invest in high end publicity.

I believe fully in giving shelter dogs a home; every dog and cat, for that matter, deserves a caring, loving home. However, the claim that purebreds have horrible health problems is one more PR tactic of the animal rights activists.  Yes, purebreds do have health problems; veterinarians can identify purebred breeds and note the problems. Some breeds tend toward specific problems. Each breed’s national breed club, such as the American Cavalier King Charles Spaniel Club, funds research for the health problems in the breed. The American Kennel Club also funds research.  Through DNA testing there are real efforts to identify the gene behind specific health problems so that those health problems may ultimately be treated or eliminated. The problem with the claim that mixed breeds do not have health problems is that statistics on their health problems are not done.  Believe me, mixed breeds do have health problems and in a later entry I will use an article that clearly outlines the purebred health vs. mixed breed health controversy.

HSUS and Peta have huge budgets for advertising, not for seeing to the actual welfare of animals, but to the “rights” of animals. Both organizations would like to see the ownership or “the enslavement” of animals ended and the guardianship of animals implemented, giving animals the same rights as humans.  I am all for humane treatment of all living beings, except for perhaps the horrible Japanese beetles that eat my roses every year, but as much as I love animals, I do not feel that they should be personified and still believe God created them to serve mankind in the many wonderful ways that they do.

The following article by Kendra Bobulsky, legislation liaison for the Golden Retriever Club of Central Ohio, compares animal rights to animal welfare and hopefully will shed some light on current developments:

I promised an article on the difference between Animal Rights, the radical anti-pet ownership movement, and Animal Welfare, where individuals fight for the health and well being of animals using grounded and intelligent means and arguments.

Animal Rights sounds like a great idea. Most of us care deeply about the safety and health of all animals. We may differ on our views of hunting, raising animals for slaughter, the use of traditional livestock management techniques such as battery cages, but no one wants to see abused, abandoned, or neglected animals hurting with no one to fight for them.

Animal Rights groups claim to fight for these animals, unfortunately they also want to eliminate hunting, meat consumption, animal breeding of any kind, and in fact, the ultimate goal of these organizations is to eliminate domesticated animal ownership entirely. They feel any use of animals, even as loved family companions, is torturing and objectifying the animals. Some organizations, such as PETA and Green Peace have, on occasion, shown their true colors, utilizing anarchist tactics to fight for Animal Rights. Thankfully the average American understands the radical nature of these groups.

Unfortunately some groups have hidden their ultimate agenda and have successfully marketed themselves as organizations that truly want to help animals and their owners. The Humane Society of The United States is the largest organization of this kind. Most Americans confuse them with local humane societies that actually rescue and re-home domesticated animals. HSUS is NOT a rescue organization. All monies going to HSUS go directly to their massive political fund, masking their true agenda in an overwhelming media campaign, manipulating caring individuals in government and across America, all the while using this ill obtained support to chip away at the rights of animal owners everywhere.

Many of the issues supported by HSUS seem well intentioned, but each political move is part of a calculated agenda that has chipped away at the rights of animal owners and we are now looking at bills that could cause irreparable damage to pure bred dog sports, including breeding restrictions, dramatically increased costs for breeders and kennel owners, collar regulations, and increased government oversight that will only hurt those of us who want to follow the rules, ignoring any problem dog owners who are supposedly the targets of these pieces of legislation.

Animal Welfare supports the animals and the owners. It uses fairness and intelligence to support rescue efforts, responsible breeding practices, and good legislation that will benefits animals and owners.

Please take the time to understand the difference. Please take the time to support Animal Welfare. Please take the time to educate others about the dramatic but hidden difference between these two movements.

The Animal Welfare Council has some more information at:

http://www.animalwelfarecouncil.com/html/aw/rights.php.

Kendra Bobulski

GRCCO Legislative Liaison.

AND MORE IN ILLINOIS:

The Sportsmen’s and Animal Owners’ Voting Alliance (SAOVA) is a nationwide, nonpartisan group of volunteers seeking to elect politicians  who will vote to protect the

The Sportsmen’s and Animal Owners’ Voting Alliance (SAOVA) is a nationwide, nonpartisan group of volunteers seeking to elect politicians who will protect the rights of sportsmen, pet owners and farmers concerned  about protecting their traditions, avocations and livelihoods from anti-hunting, anti-breeding, animal guardianship advocate.

For more information and to study the archives of this active group go to:

saova.org
 

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.<P><HR></P>Illinois Breeder Licensing HB 198/SB 53 Call to Action

February 11, 2009

SAOVA Friends,

HB 198 was scheduled to be heard by the Business/Occupational Licenses Committee on February 10th. However, the bill was never addressed in Committee.  It will remain on the Committee’s agenda and will be rescheduled at the request of Rep. Fritchey.  The bill will devastate responsible breeding in the state and hundreds of Illinois dog breeders have already voiced their opposition to HB 198. We must continue to increase the pace until the voices of opposition number in the thousands. 

Contact for HB 198 Sponsors:

Representative Angelo Saviano (R, 77)
217-782-3374 / 217-557-7211 FAX
skip@skipsaviano.com

Representative Deborah Mell (D, 40)
217-782-8117 / 217-558-6369 FAX
Deb@debmell.org

Representative Jack D. Franks (D, 63)
217-782-1717 / 217-557-2118
jack@jackfranks.org

Representative Daniel J. Burke (D, 22)
217-782-1117 / 217-782-0927 FAX
dburke@housedem.state.il.us

Representative Greg Harris (D, 13)
217-782-3835 / 217-557-6470 FAX
greg@gregharris.org

Representative Michael J. Zalewski (D, 21)
217-782-5280 / 217-557-1934
repzalewski@gmail.com

Representative Keith Farnham (D, 43)
(217) 782-8020
krfarnham@comcast.net

Representative Lou Lang (D, 16)
217-782-1252 / 217-782-9903 FAX
RepLouLang@aol.com

Representative Harry Osterman (D, 14)
217-782-8088 / 217-782-6592 FAX
HJO17@aol.com

Representative Sandy Cole (R, 62)
217-782-7320 / 217-782-1275 FAX
sandycole@comcast.net

Representative Jack McGuire (D, 86)
217-782-8090 / 217-557-6465 FAX
Jmcguire86@sbcglobal.net

Representative Al Riley (D, 38)
217-558-1007 / 217-557-1664 FAX
Rep.Riley38@sbcglobal.net

Representative Linda Chapa LaVia (D, 83)
217-558-1002 / 217-782-0927 FAX
Chapa-laviali@liga.gov

Correction: Rep. Luis Arroyo remains a cosponsor. Contact info:
(217) 782-0480 / (217) 557-9609 FAX
Repdistrict3@gmail.com 

Use the form letter available for download at the SAOVA website http://www.saova.org/Illinois.html. The form letter leaves room to add a talking point of your own for personalization.  Please sign and fax the form to all Cosponsors.  Send the form to friends and family and request their help. 

Find your own Representative http://www.ilga.gov/house/default.asp  and send your opposition to HB 198.
Use the link on the SAOVA website to email all Licensed Activities Committee Members at one time and oppose the Senate version, SB 53.

Join SAOVA, Illinois State Veterinary Association, Association of Illinois Pet Owners, American Sporting Dog Alliance, United Kennel Club, and the American Kennel Club in opposition to HB 198/SB53. Please send a copy of your organization’s opposition letter to saova@earthlink.net or fax to 866-291-2343 to be added to the growing opposition list!

And in Oklahoma: Please take note:

February 1, 2009

HB 1332:  Pending legislation that will require that anyone who is a
breeder, person, firm, corporation or other association that qualifies and
is certified as a breeder, dealer, animal rescue, out-of-state
dealer/breeder, shelter, or retail pet store that sells, gives away, or
transfers a cumulative total of twenty-five or more animals of any age in
any one (1) calendar year directly to a consumer, co-breeder, retail pet
store, to a person for research purposes, or to any person acting as a
broker who has accepted animals for transfer to a third party and is
licensed pursuant to the Oklahoma Pet Quality Assurance and Protection
Act.[1]

.        Includes all animal rescue organizations that utilize foster homes
if they accumulate more than 25 animals.

.        Stipulates that out of state breeders cannot transport in OK
without a state license.  Under the provisions this would include out of
state breeders that exhibit at dog/cat shows within the state of OK.[2]

.        Calls for the Oklahoma Department of Agriculture to develop and
implement regulation pertaining to this bill.  There is nothing that
requires representation from stakeholders or public input.

.        The bill will duplicate federal regulations and laws already in
place.  Would it not be beneficial and fiscally responsible to support the
federal agency and help to enforce laws already in place?

.        The bill proposes to assess fees and fines as the revenue source to
implement and sustain the activities of this law.  It calls for a fund
specific to the activities of this law which opens the door for donations
from individuals and nonprofits.  The state will incur the fiscal
responsibility to ensure that funds are available.[3]  The state’s
fundraising methods are to impose higher taxes.  With the expected shortfall
in state revenue is this the time to impose more tax burden on Oklahoma’s
individuals and families?

.        Gives any peace officer the authority to enter the premises of an
individual or facility. There is nothing that states peace officers will be
trained or must be accompanied by trained personnel.  

.        This bill allows members of law enforcement to enter onto property
without cause.[4]

.        Penalties include liens against the licensee’s personal property
for failure to meet fines.

.        Responsible breeders follow ethics guidelines and existing federal
laws.  The provisions of HB 1332 will encourage substandard breeders to
burrow further underground.

.        The bill does not list an element for consumer protection.
Consumers should be educated and hold a reasonable portion of the
responsibility when purchasing pets.

Summary:  HB 1332 is a continuation of last year’s attempts to impose
punitive measures that duplicate federal efforts.  This bill will have a
negative impact on responsible breeders with valid USDA licenses, those that
visit our state for recreation and legitimate organizations that provide a
valuable rescue services to animals.  The bill will have a negative fiscal
impact on tax payers and consumers while infringing upon the rights of law
bidding Oklahomans.

While OAIA encourages animal advocates to look for solutions to community
pet issues HB 1332 as written cannot solve the issues of producing healthy
pets for consumers and eliminating substandard breeding practices.

*********************************************************************************************

We are in a fight for our rights to own and breed dogs. Please take note and write your Senator and Congressman about protecting our rights please. Check the proposed legislation in your community, city, county, and state and let your opinions be known.

Until next time . . .