WHAT PUPS DOES

Learn More at SAOVA http://saova.org
HR 835 / S 707 PUPS
Bad for dogs, bad for shelters, bad for the economy

WHAT PUPS DOES:

Abandons traditional determination between wholesale and retail---so that
USDA can regulate home/hobby breeders who don't sell to pet stores.

Begins USDA regulation of anyone (with 1 intact female dog over 4 months of
age) who sells, places, or adopts out more than 50 dogs in a year ... to start.
Could easily be amended down to 10 ... to 2.

Takes away your right to privacy in your own home. USDA or their contractors
can without notice enter your home and inspect it if they SUSPECT you might
meet criteria for regulation.

Over-regulates responsible home breeders out of existence. Mandates non-
porous floors, kennel sizes, floor drains, and pages of requirements impossible
for most home breeders to follow.

Forces shelters, and home/hobby breeders to redesign their current facilities in
order to meet federal standards.

Establishes government controlled exercise standards that are not scientifically
proven.

Sets precedent with exercise standards for future rigid socialization and
breeding standards that would remove owner’s flexibility to use professional
judgment based on breed and purpose.

Reduces the ability of the American public to obtain healthy privately bred or
rescue dogs of their choosing.

Places an unfunded mandate on Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
(APHIS) and overextends their enforcement ability.

Fails to exempt sportsmen, sporting dog trainers, and hunting clubs from being
regulated alongside in-home sellers.

Adds more federal oversight and regulation into American’s daily lives.

Just Say NO to PUPS – HR 835/S 707

Happy New Year?

We have a great piece to share with you from our friend Laurie K. Telfair. I'm not sure I agree with everything in this post, especially the idea that the dog show world is dying, but this is a well-written, serious post and I hope you will enjoy it.

Happy New Year?

Laurie K. Telfair

And so, another year has passed.

I have a few dog shows scheduled in 2012 but not many. The dog show world is changing, dying actually, so it is not likely that I will be able to judge in retirement as much as I had hoped. The dog world is changing also. The culture has changed enormously. People prefer to buy their dogs from rescue or a shelter instead of getting a dog bred for a specific purpose by a breeder. At one time, there were new people flocking to the dog world. Long, long ago, my ex-husband bought me a book for Christmas called The Pleasures of Purebred Dog Ownership. I never suspected then we were living in boom times. I thought it would be that way forever.

The typical progression then was to get a purebred dog, take it to obedience class, decide to show it in obedience, then want to show it in conformation, find out it wasn’t very good for conformation, buy a “good” dog from a breeder, decide you want to breed it, get help and advice from the breeder, breed your first litter of puppies, keep a puppy from that breeding. Forty years later, you’ve bred several litters, produced a few champions and a few beloved pets, dropped a whole bunch of money into the sport, had your heart broken so many times that there is not a centimeter of it that doesn’t have scar tissue on it, traveled a million miles, have a drawer full of ribbons and a box of trophies in the garage and still have a few friends who, like you, have hung on for a lifetime.

We used to call these folks dog nuts, but that was before dogs’ testicles were routinely amputated, thus bringing a whole different meaning to the term. So now we say dog people. The difference between normal dog owners and dog people is this: normal dog owners feel responsible for their dog; dog rescue people (and God bless them; rescue is a difficult calling) feel responsible for dogs in general; dog people feel responsible for the future of dogs, especially for a particular breed. We try to preserve the history that has been passed to us, improve the health, conformation and temperament we have and pass the breed forward to those who come after us. Of course we don’t always achieve our goals. But most of us try.

I worry that many breeds, that have been nurtured through world wars and upheavals, will just die out. That most of the private donations to health research, which is heavily supported by dog people and breed clubs, will dry up. That laws restricting the ability to own dogs will continue to squeeze animals out of our lives. Sort of reminds me of the Joni Mitchell song Big Yellow Taxi, with the line, “We cut all the trees and put ‘em in a tree museum”. Things change. I just don’t like it. Bah! Humbug!

Still, I am incredibly fortunate. Remember the song from the musical, A Chorus Line, called “What I Did for Love”? You know the one: the young dancer is injured, his career perhaps over and the casting director asks the remaining auditioning dancers what they would do if they had to stop dancing today. Another dancer answers “Kiss today goodbye and point me toward tomorrow…..for I can’t forget, and I won’t regret, what I did for love.”

I don’t know that I would advise it as a plan for anyone else, but for me, nearly everything I have done in life has been done for love. My family, my dogs, the years in journalism, my friends, mostly done for love. Well, and a little money. That makes me incredibly lucky. I wish for you the same.

Happy holidays and the best of everything in the New Year.

Tennessean Showing Its Bias Again

We already knew the Tennessean was a suck up for HSUS and Janis Sontany, but they really outdid themselves with this article: Animals suffer as TN balks at cruelty laws; Humane society says state ranks near bottom of nation. Not only is the article, by Brian Haas, incredibly biased, but it is full of statements that are factually untrue. Even the caption on the article's photo is inaccurate. There were not "hundreds" of dogs involved in the Warren County case. There were 121. It makes you wonder if Mr. Haas, or anyone at the Tennessean, checks any facts at all. Or cares about them.

I doubt they will print it (they never print anything I send them — gee, wonder why?), but here's my reply:


Dear Mr. Haas,

Wow, your information in this article is really incorrect. Re:

The Humane Society of the United States has labeled Tennessee one of the worst states in the nation for protecting animals. In addition to Tennessee’s having some of the weakest laws in the United States, its legislators are chided by the group for failing to pass meaningful new animal welfare laws.

According to both the Animal Legal Defense Fund, a California-based animal rights group, and HSUS itself, which releases a report on where the states rank in terms of their animal laws each year, Tennessee is in the mid to upper tier of states as far as animal protection laws. If you will check an interview with Wayne Pacelle, head of HSUS, in Nashville last week, you will see that he said the same thing about Tennessee.

When it comes to passing laws that protect animals, Pacelle says the Volunteer State is in the middle of the pack but there's room for improvement.

Now, I realize that your article is either accidentally or intentionally very biased in favor of HSUS and promoting the laws that Rep. Sontany wants, but please try to get your facts straight. Especially when they are so easy to check.

Tennessee does have over 40 counties without animal control or shelters. Do you know some good way for those counties to come up with funding to provide animal control or shelters in this poor economy? Are there some essential services to humans you would like to see discontinued?

As far as bills concerning agriculture, Rep. Niceley is quite correct. There are already plenty of bills that protect animals. The bills that Rep. Sontany and HSUS are pushing are often not in the best interest of farmers OR in the best interest of the animals. But that is hardly likely to concern HSUS since they are not a fan of agriculture, especially any agriculture that raises animals for meat. If you would check into them more carefully you would find that they would prefer to have people eating a vegan diet.

Concerning spay/neuter laws for cats and dogs, mandatory spay/neuter programs have been a failure everywhere they have been tried across the country. They result in owner abandonment of animals and higher euthanasia rates. They do not lower the numbers of animals in shelters.

If you are going to write about HSUS and what they say about Tennessee, please try to present all sides of the issues. HSUS tries to portray itself as a mainstream group but they are a radical animal rights organization. Unfortunately, Rep. Sontany has been carrying their water for years. Rep. Sontany's bills for HSUS do not get out of committee and are not passed because the majority of Tennesseans do not support them.

For more information about HSUS you can visit the SAOVA web site.

Sincerely,
Carlotta Cooper
Tennessee Director, Sportsmen's and Animal Owners' Voting Alliance

Wilma Jones Charged

It looks like the DA in Warren County has finally charged Wilma Jones in the kennel seizure case that dates back to last March. I say "finally" because, if you will recall, there were no charges made against Ms. Jones at the time of the raid on her kennel, which prompted the judge who heard her request to regain possession of some of her personal pets to declare that the seizure of her dogs by "animal advocates" had been illegal.

I can only find one brief story online about the current status of Ms. Jones's case and it comes from a Nashville TV station:

Woman Indicted By Grand Jury On Animal Cruelty Charges

Posted: May 23, 2011 4:00 PM

WARREN COUNTY, Tenn. - A grand jury has handed down animal cruelty charges against a Warren County woman accused of keeping more than 100 dogs living in squalor at a suspected puppy mill.

Wilma Jones faces 10 counts of animal cruelty, and five counts of possession of controlled substances.

Back in March, law enforcement officers and an animal rescue group seized more than 120 dogs from Jones' Centertown property.

They found most of the animals standing in filth, and suffering from infections, dehydration, and malnourishment.

She relinquished custody of all but four of the animals.

Just to refresh your memory, this is the case where a local person in Warren County, working with the Animal Rescue Corps (hello Scotlund Haisley!), spent three weeks visiting Ms. Jones's kennel and "gathering evidence," (or was that planting evidence?). Instead of trying to help Ms. Jones with any of her dogs or kennels, the Warren County humane society of McMinnville (sic) was hellbent on getting rid of her and having her arrested, no matter what they had to do.

The "controlled substances" in this story are unspecified. I have no idea what they were, or how they got to Ms. Jones's home. For all I know the person visiting Ms. Jones's home for three weeks may have left them there, or ARC "rescuers" may have placed them on the site. Maybe they were that uncertain about their "cruelty" charges sticking and figured they'd better add something to the mix, just in case.

As for the animal cruelty charges, those will have to be decided in court, but juries are often pre-disposed to be swayed by any sad pictures of animals. Logic usually flies out the window when someone is presented with sad-faced puppies, even if those pictures have been staged.

And, just out of curiosity, if 121 dogs were taken in the raid, and they were in such terrible shape, as alleged by "animal advocates" and "rescuers," why are there only 10 counts of animal cruelty?

I hope Ms. Jones has a good attorney representing her. Too often breeders are railroaded in these cases and don't really receive a fair trial. You can compare Ms. Jones's case to another case where an older woman was brought to trial over the care of her dogs. In this case Jean Cyhanick was charged in Virginia with endangering her dogs' lives because several of her toy dogs had dental problems. That's right. I'm not making this stuff up. She was convicted of animal abuse. Friends have raised over $35,000 on her behalf and she is appealing. Legal sources say she has a good chance of winning and overturning the current law in Virginia that allows this kind of charge to be made.

Are Tennessee animal cruelty penalties too lax?

Here's a recent posting from WATE-TV in Knoxville. It addresses the issue of mandatory minimum sentencing for animal cruelty convictions.

Are Tennessee animal cruelty penalties too lax?

Tuesday, May 17, 2011 5:48 PM EST

By HANA KIM

6 News Reporter

KNOXVILLE (WATE) - A Knox County assistant district attorney who has prosecuted her share of animal cruelty cases hopes the state Legislature will take a closer look at current laws.

There are about 20 active animal cruelty cases in the county and if history is any indication, most of the defendants will not spend any time in jail even if they're convicted.

ADA Joanie Stewart hopes lawmakers will perhaps implement a mandatory minimum sentence for anyone convicted of animal cruelty.

Jeffrey Coppock, 44, of Knoxville, was due for a preliminary hearing Tuesday on charges that he beat a Shih Tzu named Rosie to death. However, his hearing was reset to July 20.

Coppock was arrested in April after deputies got a call from his neighbor on Evening Star Lane.

When deputies got there, they found Rosie in the backyard with blood around her nose, broken bones and only taking shallow breaths. The dog later died.

In another case Knox County case, a three-year-old dog nicknamed the "Little Brown Dog" made national headlines in November 2009 after she was dragged nearly a mile behind a pickup truck.

She survived and her former owner, Jimmy Lovell, is awaiting trial. Because of the extent of Little Brown Dog's injuries, Lovell was charged with a felony.

"On the felony cases, the animal has been treated in a sadistic and depraved manner," Stewart explained.

"A lot of our offenders are first time offenders so they are eligible for programs that would be diversion, that would be probation if they don't have a lengthy criminal record," Stewart added.

If there is no bodily injury or death to the animal, most cases are deemed misdemeanors.

"You have so many crimes that have the minimum jail sentences. DUI is one, 48 hours and that's a misdemeanor," Stewart said.

Stewart believes a mandatory minimum sentence will send a stronger message and hopefully help protect animals.

If a person is convicted of his first animal cruelty charge and picks up a second charge, that second offense is automatically a felony.

Aside from the fact that the ADA in the article doesn't actually make a case for mandatory minimum sentencing, and only recites a short list of cases which are waiting to be tried, the article is fairly illogical in other ways.

Here are some problems with the article. While I don't have much respect for HSUS or the Animal Legal Defense Fund, those fun-loving people who are always demanding that animal cruelty laws be made tougher, both entities came out this year with reports that placed Tennessee in the mid to upper reaches of states having strong laws against animal cruelty. ALDF placed Tennessee in the top tier of states with animal cruelty laws. So there. Hey, you people who are always claiming that Tennessee is full of people who are cruel to animals! What do you think about that? (Nope, I won't give links to those groups. Not on this site.)

Another problem with this article, or with the thought process of the ADA mentioned in it, is that mandatory minimum sentences don't do what they are intended to do. Many animal cruelty cases which are charged as misdemeanors are carried out by children and teens. Do you want to have a mandatory minimum sentence for crimes committed by minors? Well, a lot of prosecutors don't. When it comes to charging minors with those crimes, they would rather not do it. So, faced with either prosecuting a kid with a very stiff mandatory sentence or not charging him at all, they let him go and they don't prosecute. The result is that when you have mandatory minimum sentences you often have fewer misdemeanor crimes prosecuted — exactly the opposite effect that people pushing for tougher laws want.

There is a bill in the Tennessee legislature right now concerning mandatory minimum sentencing for animal cruelty cases but if the legislators have any sense at all they will let it die and leave prosecution and sentencing to the courts.

Highway Robbery in Tennessee

Here's a great video by a Tennessee news station (NewsChannel 5) on civil asset forfeiture. It shows how police are using this practice to steal money from motorists using the pretense that it's drug money.

So, why am I posting this video here on a list about animals? Because this is exactly the same practice that is being used to steal dogs from breeders, not just in Tennessee, but all over the country. Civil asset forfeiture laws are being misused to allow law enforcement (and animal rights-driven rescues) to seize animals on the suspicion of someone having committed a crime, before anything has been proven. And those animals are being dispersed, with the money made from them going to animal rights-oriented rescues and shelters. Those actions are just as illegal as what you see being done in this video.

Group helps McKamey recover costs

I wish someone would help me out when I make bonehead mistakes.

Group helps McKamey recover costs

Staff Report

The McKamey Animal Center, out about $50,000 last year after a judge dismissed animal cruelty charges that city animal control officers brought against the Pet Company store in Hamilton Place mall, has gotten help from the ASPCA.

The American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals earlier this month gave McKamey a $15,000 grant to help defray the center's cost for caring for the 84 animals taken from the store last summer after a Tennessee Department of Agriculture inspector found them without water and rolling around in their own feces in extreme heat.

The cases were dismissed by a special appointed judge after Chattanooga City Judge Sherry Paty declared a mistrial and recused herself in July, citing a July 1 email from Mayor Ron Littlefield urging her to not "leave McKamey holding the bag" for more than $40,000 in expenses.

A few days later, the Tennessee Department of Agriculture said Pet Company would be able to keep its state operating license after store officials agreed to comply with conditions laid out by the department.

Karen Walsh, executive director of the McKamey Animal Center, said in a prepared statement that she is grateful to the ASPCA, particularly for its recognition of the efforts of the center and assistance to help Chattanooga recoup some of the money spent protecting the animals involved in this highly publicized case.

"The cost of animal care during cases like this one often break animal welfare organizations, and many decide not to prosecute," she said.

You know, I'm glad that McKamey wasn't reimbursed for the full amount. I hope they do learn some kind of lesson from this experience. Namely, that they should not try to prosecute legal pet or animal businesses just because they don't like them on moral grounds. It is legal in Chattanooga, Tennessee, and elsewhere, to sell pets in pet stores, even though animal rights people (and that includes McKamey) don't like it. An animal control agency should not go on a mission to shut down legal businesses just because they don't approve of them. Nor should they try to exaggerate evidence or seize animals. There are still some judges who won't go along with those tactics.

Animal control agencies serve a valuable purpose in society but they need to operate within the law. And it's up to citizens to be watchful and make sure that the laws that are passed are reasonable and fair to all animal owners and businesses. We all want animals to be treated well, but we cannot allow animal owners or businesses to be railroaded by the animal rights movement.