Thursday, May 28, 2009

Minister Warns: Anti's Using Religion to Advance Cause

From The Animal Agriculture Alliance and U.S. Sportsmen's Alliance

Minister Warns: Anti’s Using Religion to Advance Cause

Groups Use Faith to Sway Youth

Religion is being used by animal rights groups to advance a radical agenda according to an ordained Baptist Minister.

Dr. Wes Jamison, an ordained Minister as well as a professor of Communications at Palm Beach Atlantic University, spoke at the Animal Agriculture Alliance’s eighth annual stakeholder summit, held May 12-13 in Virginia. Dr. Jamison boldly stated, "Animal rights activists are using religious messages to recruit a segment of the millennial generation that has little doctrinal anchor in order to advance their vegetarian agenda."

He went on to explain that there are two factors pushing animal rights’ groups in this direction:

Religiously devout individuals often are generous donors; and

Religiously devout individuals maintain high levels of devotion to causes for long periods of time.

Dr. Jamison warned that animal rights’ groups are intentionally selecting certain biblical passages that focus on individuals’ compassion and guilt. He concluded by cautioning “people against buying in to such messages and encourage people to do their own review of Biblical scripture and literature.”

To hear more, please Click Here for an interview with Dr. Jamison courtesy of the Animal Agriculture Alliance.

Tuesday, May 26, 2009

HSUS is successfully blocking the Atlanta TV report that Critized where it spends its money

From PetPac's website

An ABC-TV affiliate in Atlanta aired an Investigative Report on where the Humane Society of the United States spends its money. Twenty four hours later, the story was pulled from the air. I wasn’t able to locate it in their archives either, even though there were older investigative stories still there. I spoke with Mark Winne of Channel 2 and was told that it is routine to take down this type of news report, however he was less specific when asked why it wasn’t saved in their archives. A copy of the video played on YouTube for one day then mysteriously disappeared from that site as well.

PetPAC posted, on our site, the written transcript you see below, sent to us by several of our supporters.

Friday morning PetPAC received an email from an attorney representing WSB-TV ordering us to remove the written word from public view. I have to conclude, as others have already, that this demand has been triggered by some powerful action to squelch the story.

Since HSUS has not come out publicly to protest the facts contained in this story, nor has WSB-TV issued any form of retraction I think it logical to assume the story has to be substantially true and accurate.

So much for freedom of the press and the First Amendment to the Constitution. Since those of us in PetPAC do not want to upset TV broadcasters, we have not made any further attempts to get copies of the video story. However, the transcript sent to us from others, not taken from the station website, unsubstantiated as it is reprinted below.

Where Humane Society Donations Really Go

Posted: 4:03 pm EDT May 14, 2009Updated: 4:20 pm EDT May 14, 2009

ATLANTA -- A Channel 2 investigation is looking into millions of
dollars in donations given to the Humane Society of the United States.

A national consumer organization says the society solicits
pet-lovers for money, but little to none of that money ever goes to
help local shelters.

Critics tell Channel 2 Action News reporter Amanda Rosseter that
this isn´t just consumers misunderstanding who they are giving in to -
but an organization actively misleading donors to get money.

"They do their marketing very well, that's for sure," said Trey Burley of PAWS Atlanta.

Critics say the national organization takes advantage of people who
think they are giving to local shelters. DeKalb's "PAWS" shelter says
there is no regular funding help from the $100 million HSUS budget.

"I think that some of the folks who donate to the national
organization may be under the false pretense that that money is going
to a local cause," said Burley.

While the HSUS does work to stop puppy mills, it also gets media
coverage and donations doing it; but the puppies then go to local
shelters who have to pay and care for them.

"They may initialize the resources for a rescue, but again the
animals go to a shelter somewhere in the country," said Richard Rice,
VP of the Atlanta Humane Society.

Critics say HSUS also takes advantage of high-profile events. After Hurricane Katrina, HSUS CEO Wayne Pacelle promised on national TV to
reunite pets with their owners-and raised $34 million for the cause;
but public disclosures of where that money went add up to less than $7
million. The Louisiana attorney general launched an 18-month-long
investigation, and it then ended it when HSUS offered to build the
state a new shelter.
Then there's $112 million in expenses -- most of which appears to
have gone to legislation for animal rights bills. The list includes
raccoons, mice, wild horses, burros and primates.

The Center for Consumer Freedom says all worthy causes, but HSUS shouldn't mislead to get money.

So where does all the money go?

"It goes to lobbying, it goes to political contributions, it doesn´t
go to pay huge staff salaries and benefits," said David Marposko with
Center for Consumer Freedom.

Channel 2 Action News went to a local HSUS meeting to find out. The
two hour discussion was about activist plans and lobbying. The Georgia
director for the HSUS agrees that´s mostly what she does.
"I think that in all of our literature, it is very explicit as to
what our campaigns are and what we are doing," said Cheryl McAuliffe,
Georgia Director for HSUS. "We help where we can and focus on our
programs, which are national and international."

McAuliffe said there are just too many local shelters to help.

"I always tell people, contribute to your local shelter first," said McAuliffe.

When asked how much her budget is for the state of Georgia,
McAuliffe said she didn´t have a budget and neither did the other
states. McAuliffe said all money is controlled from headquarters in
Washington, D.C.

Another organization to take away your rights-

Animal Rescue.

The majority of people who live with animals love them and feel an emotional bond with their animal. The topic of "animal rescue" is also an emotional one. Who wants to see another being suffer? Not many. Advertisements showing those sad, brown eyes staring out of the bars of a cage evoke emotions that lead us to open our wallets and give money to end the "suffering"- but beware! It may not be the animals that are getting your money, but some lawyer or politician! Is that what you intended?

If you really want to help animals, give directly to a local shelter. Giving actual food, towels, bedding, bowels, leashes, collars, flea treatments, shampoo- you get the idea. That is the most helpful of all. If you give money, you may just be paying to limit your rights.

By now we know that HSUS is not who they have claimed to be- the national care-givers- they are just the "voice"- in CONGRESS to LIMIT your rights. It seems that another organization, The Animal Rescue Site, is also nothing more than a political lobbing machine to limit the rights of American citizens and determine where you can get your next pet, how you will care for it, and what activities with that pet will be legal or not.

This is from the website (under the Charitable Partners link):

"In January 2005, with the combination of The Fund for Animals and The
Humane Society of the United States, the groups were able to launch a new
Animal Protection Litigation Section which conducts even more precedent-setting
legal campaigns on behalf of animals in state and federal courts around
the country. With a staff of eight full-time lawyers, as well as numerous law
clerks, administrative staff, outside counsel, and pro-bono attorneys, the
section is the largest in-house animal protection litigation department in
the country."

Be careful who gets your money. The best way to Rescue Animals is to give needed items to the shelters who are actually caring for the animals.

Monday, May 25, 2009

PA- Lehigh County Humane Society hard to wake up

Lehigh County Humane Society hard to wake up

May 16, 2009
Bill White

Until it has leaders who acknowledge all the problems, it never will move forward.

When the Lehigh County commissioners Wednesday night rejected funding for the Lehigh County Humane Society's animal control work, they were sending a couple of messages.

One, as articulated by Commissioners Dean Browning and Glenn Eckhart, was that the county shouldn't be sending money to such a well-heeled organization at a time when the county's fiscal situation is dire. They pointed out that the Humane Society's investment portfolio has grown to almost $1.8 million.

The other was that they're not crazy about the shelter's operations. ''I don't want tax dollars going to this facility,'' Eckhart said. He and others complained about the humane society's unwillingness to explore a no-kill approach, its lack of transparency and its euthanization methods.

Even the people who voted to give LCHS the budgeted $22,500 for its services went out of their way to make it clear they don't like what's happening there. Commissioners Percy Dougherty and Bill Leiner both said they hope this will be a ''wake-up call'' for the Humane Society's leaders.

My own feeling is that an atom bomb wouldn't wake those people up. I've been writing about their antiquated approach for years, to no effect, and there have been much more vociferous critics. If the commissioners are just figuring out that LCHS needs an overhaul, they haven't been paying attention.

The Kill vs. No Kill philosophical argument gets most of the attention, but that's never been my main focus. My complaint has been that the Humane Society won't take even the most basic steps toward reducing the need for euthanization of unwanted dogs and cats.

They would include: A comprehensive adoption program that includes convenient hours and an aggressive schedule of off-site adoptions. A comprehensive foster care program. A feral cat trap-neuter- return program. A high-volume, low-cost spay/neuter program. Cooperation with local rescue groups.

Outreach to the community to improve pet retention. In-house medical and behavior rehabilitation. A strong volunteer program. Aggressive public relations efforts.

LCHS has improved a bit in a few of these areas, but for the most part, it seems to run the same way it did years ago. Until it has leaders who acknowledge all the problems, it never will move forward.

My chiding has been too even-handed to suit some of the Humane Society's more rabid critics. But the group's leadership hasn't seen it that way. One of the oddities of the Pennsylvania SPCA's raid on Almost Heaven dog kennel in Upper Milford Township last Oct. 1 was that when LCHS Executive Director Bruce Fritch recognized me there, he went on a wild tirade. I had to lure him to a far corner so his ranting wouldn't turn up as background for the ''Animal Cops'' taping of the raid.

Beyond his complaints that my criticism has been unfair, Fritch was angry because people had posted insulting, even somewhat threatening, comments on the online version of my most recent column about LCHS. I let him scream himself out and tried to explain that I don't moderate -- or even read, in many cases -- the online comments. He wasn't buying it.

I was surprised to see Fritch there at all. It turns out that he wanted raiders to know the Humane Society was prepared to take in any dogs that were confiscated from Almost Heaven. Although he stayed there all day, the rescued dogs were driven to the PSPCA's shelter in Philadelphia.

In light of the Humane Society's history with Almost Heaven owner Derbe ''Skip'' Eckhart, it would have been an unlikely landing place in any event. Thanks to the connection between former LCHS cruelty investigator Orlando Aguirre and Eckhart, the Humane Society at one point was supplying dogs for Eckhart's controversial ''rescue'' operation. What's more, in his later capacity as a state dog warden, Aguirre helped keep Almost Heaven semi-respectable by issuing satisfactory inspection reports, particularly embarrassing in light of the horrible conditions found during the raid. Just six weeks before, a team of four dog law inspectors -- including Aguirre and new director Sue West -- gave the place a clean bill of health once again.

The discrepancy between the awful conditions and dog law's reports, including the role of Aguirre and other inspectors, has been the subject of a months-long investigation by the state Inspector General's Office.

There was a nice crowd of animal welfare people at Wednesday night's meeting, and many of the commissioners said encouraging things. Nevertheless, if any of this served as a real wake-up call for Bruce Fritch and company, I'll be surprised.

They're very sound sleepers. 610-559-2146

Possible Investigation into HSUS over whether HSUS imprperly spent the funds collected to benefit pets displaced by Hurricane Katrina

Attention dog lovers!

The nonprofit Center for Consumer Freedom has learned that the office of Louisiana Attorney General James "Buddy" Caldwell is considering whether to re-open an investigation into the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS). The investigation concerns whether HSUS improperly spent some of the $34 million it raised for the benefit of pets displace d by Hurricane Katrina.
Apparently, Caldwell's office received a deluge of phone calls last week, beginning the day after Atlanta ABC affiliate WSB-TV aired an exposé of HSUS's fundraising activities. In that report, WSB called HSUS "an organization actively misleading donors to get money." The TV station also explored just how little of HSUS's "Katrina" fundraising appears to have been spent on genuine Katrina-related disaster relief.
This was a fabulous piece of journalism on a subject many news outlets have been too intimidated or too biased to cover. (WSB-TV is working on a follow-up story, but we'll all just have to wait patiently for that.)
An anonymous animal lover has made the video of the May 14 report available at BQGu -- Note that there's no way to know if HSUS will be successful at continually censoring this video. (At least one previous version was pulled from YouTube this week after being viewed more than 50,000 times.)
Here's what you can do to help:
(1) CALL the Consumer Protection Section of the Louisiana Attorney General's Office during regular business hours. The toll-free number is 800-351-4889. If you live in Louisiana, please call the local number at 225-326-6465, or the general office number at 225-326-6200.

Tell whoever answers that you would like the Attorney General to re-open his investigation of the Humane Society of the United States. Remind him/her that there's no official accounting of how HSUS spent most of the $34 million it raised after Hurricane Katrina.

Before you hang up, ask to be transferred to Assistant Attorney General Mimi Hunley. If you get through to Ms. Hunley, please be polite and make the same request of her or her staff.
(2) P lease follow-up with a polite e-mail to, and let the A.G.'s office read your request in your own words. Drop me an e-mail at and let me know how everything went. (Or just "BCC" me on your follow-up e-mail.)
(3) Share the video of WSB-TV's exposé with your friends, colleagues, family, and neighbors. It remains available (for now) at BQGu -- If this video should disappear, feel free to e-mail me and ask if another version has popped up anywhere.
(4) If you are able, please consider making a donation to the Center for Consumer Freedom so we can keep putting pressure on the Humane Society of the United States. We've got some exciting plans for the months ahead, but we need additional resources to make it all work. For every dollar we raise, HSUS typically raises about $30.

Donations can be made at http://www.consumer and they are tax-deductible to the extent allowed by law. The Center for Consumer Freedom is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization.
Thanks for all you do to provide for animals. Remember: You are the real animal advocates. And we're on your side.

David Martosko
Director of Research
The Center for Consumer Freedom

Tuesday, May 19, 2009

Keep The animal rights out of your Church
Martin Luther King Jr. once said, "I have so much to do today that I
should spend the first three hours in prayer."

I've been thinking about that quote a lot lately. I was raised in a
Christian family, and I don't know how I'd get through a day without
prayer. Blessed with good health, wonderful friends, a loving family,
and fabulous dogs - I spend a lot of time giving thanks. I also ask
for the usual things - strength, inspiration, guidance. Lately I've
had to ask the Lord for something new and unexpected - help in keeping
the animal rights industry out of His church.

A friend contacted me last week because her Daily Devotional had a
segment which seemed like a good thing, but was a hook for a very bad
thing. My friend, a devout Christian, knew what she was looking at
because she knows the subversive nature and destructive agenda of the
animal rights (AR) industry. Therefore, she was alarmed to see a link
to the deceptively named "Humane" Society of the United States (HSUS)
in her Daily Devotional. She showed it to me, and asked my opinion on
the other groups with website links on the same page.

My investigation led to a mixture of good news and bad news. Here's
the verdict. Christians need to be more vigilant in guarding the gate.
The animal rights industry, whose hypocrisy knows no bounds, is coming
soon to a church near you. (Check your Daily Devotional, they may have
already infiltrated your place of worship.)

HSUS President/CEO Wayne Pacelle does his homework. He sees that
American farmers are coming together to stand shoulder-to-shoulder
against the animal rights industry. Farmers, now I'm speaking directly
to you. Pacelle knows that you're ten times tougher and more savvy
than the emotional AR cult members that he moves around like pawns on
a chess board. He sees you speaking out against the animal rights
movement. He knows that you are feeling a growing resolve to protect
your families and your future from the destructive rampage of
HSUS-driven laws.

So how does he fight you? How does he undermine you? Wayne Pacelle is
a master of Machiavellian manipulation. There's nothing random about
the fact that HSUS recently conned Rush Limbaugh into recording a
Public Service Announcement endorsing the “Humane” Society of the
United States "outreach to the faith-based community." (Random, no.
Bizarre, yes. There are so many things wrong with that sentence it's
enough to make your head spin.) Rush Limbaugh a spokesman for an
organization that epitomizes overreaching government and destruction
of individual freedoms? Black is white. Up is down. The sun is cold.

But you can bet your bottom dollar there's a method to the madness.

Limbaugh's PSA's for HSUS exploded in his face. Rush has infuriated
and alienated farmers, hunters, fishermen, gun owners, responsible pet
owners and breeders, scientists, doctors, and pretty much anybody who
loves someone battling a dreaded disease (See "The Irreconcilable
Differences of Rush Limbaugh and HSUS" on this Blog.)

Leaving Rush's credibility in smashed and scattered pieces all over
the left side of the road, Wayne Pacelle didn’t even glance in the
rearview mirror. He had what he wanted. And he was in a hurry. There
was a church up ahead with a side door that Rush Limbaugh had opened.

My dear Christian friends, I say this with love and a protective
instinct. When HSUS is reaching out to you, it isn’t because they want
to trade favorite Scripture verses. Picture yourself loaded with
cash, on election day, in a room full of pickpockets and Washington DC
lobbyists. HSUS wants your vote and they want your money (not
necessarily in that order.) Wayne Pacelle knows that Christians,
compassionate by nature, give generously - and in these tough economic
times, he's getting creative.

After all, HSUS is still a little bit shy of $204 million in assets,
and Pacelle has to earn his six-figure salary. Earn it how? Excellent
question. Less than 4% of HSUS income goes to hands-on care of

When I checked out the "Web Sites for Animal Lovers" in my friend's
recent Daily Devotional, three were O.K. But one (as previously
mentioned) was the-worst-of-the-worst of the AR groups - HSUS. The
other was a seemingly harmless website called "" -
which is a "front" page because it contains a link which takes you to
"Born Free USA" and the "Animal Protection Institute." These are both
radical animal rights industry groups which support HSUS - and
demonize farmers. The websites of these two organizations reveal
clearly the true agenda of the animal rights movement - with
inflammatory language listing the supposed cruelty of even organic and
free-range farms.

And yes, of course, all of the websites of these radical AR groups
relentlessly ask for donations, and encourage viewers to join their
mailing lists - so they can inundate the reader daily with their
propaganda/requests for money.

How do you keep the animal rights industry out of your church? Be
proactive. When I spoke to someone on the editorial staff of my
friend’s Daily Devotional, she had no clue about the true agenda of
the AR industry, until I explained it to her. It was an innocent

(See "Got 50?" on this Blog.) Put the the editor of your Daily
Devotional at the top of your "Get 50” List. Educate this person. It's
important to them to ensure that Daily Devotional content is
appropriate. Be a good shepherd. Help them out by teaching them the
truth about the AR industry - before they inadvertently make the flock
vulnerable to circling wolves.

It’s wonderful to have messages reinforcing and affirming our love of
animals, in faith-based materials. But website links can be fraught
with peril. The safe recommendation any Daily Devotional can make is
to volunteer or donate money directly to your local animal shelter.

Your Friend in the Fight,

Tina M. Perriguey
P.S. After several days of phone calls, I finally spoke to an editor
who is a decision-maker at the parent publishing company of the Daily
Devotional discussed in my article. He was attentive, thoughtful, and
thanked me for an "enlightening conversation." I sent him several
website links, so that he could further educate himself as to the
truth about the animal rights industry. He promised to get back to me
after he had done some reading. I will send an update after I hear
back from him. --TMP

CA- City Curbs Dog Rescuers

City curbs dog rescuers
By Dana Bartholomew 818-713-3730 I
Staff Writer
Updated: 05/16/2009 11:56:45 PM PDT
The pooches can cost up to $750. Only they're not breeder dogs but
pound hounds rescued for $40 or less from city animal shelters.

Los Angeles officials have accused private rescuers of cherry-picking
their finest Fidos at cut-rate fees, then selling them for profit.

But allegations surrounding a new city ordinance to ban the practice
have provoked howls from

animal rescue groups who say their veterinary and boarding costs far
exceed returns from marked-up adoptions.

"It's outrageous. I'm so ... mad there's smoke coming out of my ears,"
said Pnina Gersten of Sherman Oaks, who finds shelter animals for many
nonprofit animal rescue agencies. "They do not sell dogs. Everyone is
in the red. You cannot make money off of this. It's impossible."

"It's insane, ridiculous," added Melya Kaplan of Voice for the Animals
in Venice, which charges $150 per dog after spending an average of
$500 per canine. "I don't know of any rescuer making any money and
going to the Bahamas."

The outcry followed a May 8 vote by the City Council to restrict
nonprofit rescue groups from selling shelter animals obtained at
discount rates for more than their cost of upkeep.

The ordinance also allows annual audits of city-approved rescue

The city was prepared to give such rescue groups first choice of
mostly dogs and cats - with fees waived for selected agencies. But out
of concerns about gifts of public property, officials opted to
maintain rules that allow residents to choose animals on the first day
they are available, after which those rescue groups - called New Hope
Partners - can rescue the pets in their two-week life at six city

Higher adoption prices

The public now pays the city up to $91 to adopt a dog and $68 for a
cat. While more than 80 approved rescue groups now pay only the $40
spay-neuter fee, according to a new fee schedule, many then post
substantially higher adoption prices.

One rescue partner, Beagles and Buddies, demanded donations from $150
to $750 per dog, "depending on the age and the breed," according to
its Web site. The El Monte agency did not return calls last week.

More typical private rescue adoption fees from mutts to purebreds
range from $200 to $500 per dog.

"There was a concern that there might be some bad players who might
take the animals and sell them," Councilman Richard Alarc n said last
week. "I believe that if a nonprofit organization is getting a
donation for the dog that exceeds the cost of its administration ...
it might appear to be a giveaway of public funds.

"We wanted the animals to be distributed fairly."

The decision to limit pet profiteering followed a letter from a former
rescuer that pressed the city to amend its plan to grant rescuers
first dibs on the most desirable animals - then re-sell them at higher

Phyllis Daugherty had also supplied city officials with a list of
approved rescue groups and their posted adoption fees.

"I had no idea that this would make this uproar," said Daugherty,
director of Animal Issues Movement and a former city employee. "I just
assumed that everyone knew they were selling them to recover the cost.

HSUS is not giving money to dogs- they give money to Politicians

WSB-TV Aftermath: The Knives Are Out At HSUS
By ESaunders

It has been an interesting weekend since the May 14th release of the WSB-TV investigation of the Humane Society of the United States' fundraising practises and the use of those funds. The reaction of the Humane Society of the United States executive team and employees has been dramatic, if not over the top.

Apparently the HSUS executive has not been content to stop with the rumored unleashing the HSUS legal team on WSB-TV. This is a rumor supported by the swift removal of both the text, viewer comments and video from the WSB-TV website by the afternoon of Friday, May 15th and the subsequent removal of the text article from Google's cache system by Saturday, May 16th. The speed of this has been startling considering that images in Google's cache can linger for days, weeks and even years in some cases. This process can be accelerated by website owner request.

Since May 14th, the number of personal attacks by both the HSUS executive and employees has been escalating and even some of their own supporters have not been safe from the spatter. Consider the following:

a.. The article posted on "Civil Eats" by the Senior Director of the HSUS factory farming campaign, Paul Shapiro. Aptly titled, "Lose Pretty or Win Ugly", Mr. Shapiro proceeds to launch a series of attacks that could as easily describe HSUS tactics as the opponents named in the article. The comment, "When it comes to campaigning, CCF isn't exactly known for its fidelity to the truth." is particularly ironic after the admissions of HSUS Georgia Director Cheryl McAuliffe that most of her job entails activist planning and lobbying. With her further admission that all finances are controlled from Washington headquarters, it seems unlikely that Georgia is the only state with this proportion of political activity. It is even more ironic considering the HSUS ran an online fundraising campaign using the following soliciting statement beside the donation check box
a.. Yes! I want to make a special gift to help The Humane Society of the United States care for the dogs seized in the Michael Vick case and to support other vital animal protection programs. (Click here to see the image) As I have written before, HSUS was not the agency caring for the dogs but instead it was the organization Bad Rap in association with the ASPCA, while HSUS was recommending the Michael Vick dogs be euthanized.
a.. HSUS Chief Operating Officer Michael Markarian and HSUS Internet Brand Manager Carie Lewis were actively forwarding the article "CCF Continues to Decieve Journalists, Public" from the blog, Digging Through The Dirt through the social networks via Twitter (pdf of image available in case Twitter post disappears) yet never acknowledge that the CCF statistics are independently confirmed through this website. This raises the question, if the CCF data is accurate (which it is) then why does HSUS continue to claim deception? The "Digging Through the Dirt" Blog even accused CCF of attacking HSUS with Craigslist postings. However, there is one problem with this accusation. Its not CCF, which I know for a fact. No, it isn't me either but I'm going to leave it at that for now.
b.. HSUS CEO Wayne Pacelle has attacked the Center for Consumer Freedom's status as a 501(c) 3 tax-exempt charity despite the evidence provided by WSB-TV which throws the HSUS' own 501(c) 3 tax-exempt staus into doubt.
c.. Andy Vance and I were called the "Limbaugh and Coulter of the meat industry" by HSUS employee Barbara Henderson. This was by far the mildest and most entertaining of the attacks to date for a couple of reasons. (1) I'm not certain that the meat industry really knows or cares much about either or myself. (2) Didn't Rush Limbaugh just do a couple of public service announcements for the Humane Society of the United States that he has taken ALOT of heat for? It probably isn't good policy to use a celebrity supporter's name as an insult attempt, even in jest.

WSB-TV may have pulled their very brave report from public viewing, but the awareness this story has raised has certainly struck a nerve up to the highest levels of the Humane Society of the United States. If there was nothing to the story or the questions it has raised, why are they waging a war of personal attacks instead of simply laying out the numbers and the data? Equally interesting is the question, "Why are the HSUS executive leveling accusations that match the HSUS as closely, if not more closely, than those they are attacking?"

Copyright 2009 by Erica Saunders
All rights reserved

IL- Dog Owners Divided by HSUS Bag of Dirty Tricks

Illinois Dog Owners Divided
By HSUS Bag Of Dirty Tricks

American Sporting Dog Alliance

This article is archived at:

There is very little good that we can say about the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS), the political arm of the radical animal rights movement. However, we must credit HSUS with being very politically astute, as their leaders, lobbyists and supporters have demonstrated dramatically in Illinois over the past two months.

Illinois dog owners had successfully stopped two pieces of onerous animal rights legislation, which would have repressively regulated all kennels including very small-scale hobby breeders, destroyed constitutional protections of due process under the law, fair and equal treatment under the law and the right to own and enjoy private property, and criminalized docking tails based on emotion and myth and in ignorance of the facts.

A strong outpouring of dog owners'opposition caused these bad bills to be bottled up in committee, and they didn't have enough votes to be passed.

At that point, HSUS was beaten. Dog owners had successfully fought for and protected their rights by stating the facts and telling the truth.

In Illinois, the truth is that existent laws are very stringent and have completely addressed every kennel problem that has been found for many years, and that tail docking is a safe and almost painless procedure that benefits many dogs.

Then, HSUS pulled out its favorite bag of political dirty tricks in order to divide dog owners and send a mixed message to the Legislature. A few organizations representing dog owners fell for these tricks, and the HSUS plot against our rights was given new life.

It was a classic sucker play. The treachery of some dog owners' groups accomplished what HSUS wanted to accomplish, but had failed to do.

The turncoat dog owners agreed to negotiate and support (or not oppose, which amounts to the same thing) the creation of a task force to study the need for new laws. The task force is based on wholly fictitious premises (please see our report from last week at and is stacked to give animal rights fanatics as much as a 10-5 voting edge that dooms dog owners to a loss of their rights through bad legislation in the future. HSUS succeeded in convincing some dog owners groups to sign their own death warrants.

In last week's report , we urged dog owners to take action to assure that the resolution creating the task force was under the jurisdiction of the House Agriculture and Conservation Committee, which understands animal issues. Through your help, we succeeded, and the resolution was assigned to the Agriculture and Conservation Committee, where it will get the most knowledgeable and unbiased consideration.

Now, we have to restore unity and undo the divisiveness created by HSUS.

HSUS targets six groups of dog owners in their tactics to divide and conquer:

1. Dog owners who are fearful and timid, and think that "compromise" is the only way to preserve even a pathetic vestige of their rights. It is a current example of the "better red than dead" mindset during the Cold War. These people lack the courage to fight for their rights and are willing to deal them away in exchange for some diluted form of survival
2. Dog owners who want to be seen as "part of the process," and seek out "leadership" roles in order to stroke their egos with illusions of self-importance.
3. Dog owner who have an inherent faith in "the system," but who fail to realize that animal rights groups and Illinois "machine" politicians like Rep. John A. Fritchey and Sen. Dan Kotowski (the sponsors of the legislation who are HSUS tools) are experts at unfairly manipulating the system to get what they want.
4. Dog owners who are elitists in some sense, such as show people who think people who raise companion animals are inferior, or field trialers who think people who raise hunting dogs are second-class citizens.
5. Selfish dog owners who care only about protecting their own interests, and would sell out anyone else in order to save their own hides.
6. And dog owners who accept parts of the animal rights agenda, such as opposition to "puppy mills," and are not able to see the true goals of HSUS, which are to gradually eliminate all ownership of animals in America. These peop le have bought into the HSUS propaganda, even though it completely contradicts the facts.
The American Sporting Dog Alliance strongly believes that the vast majority of dog and kennel owners are the good guys. We are the people who love dogs, breed dogs that are healthy, genetically sound and have great temperaments, and who have done 99% of the hard work to make the lives of dogs in America better than at any time in history.

We will never agree to any legislation that takes away or compromises our rights to continue to do what's best for the welfare of our dogs.

Thus, we are urging all Illinois dog owners to help us to restore unity in the face of the HSUS onslaught that has divided dog owners. Our unity was damaged when some groups decided to negotiate with HSUS, and the sham task force Senate resolution (SJR 56) was the result.

We are asking all Illinois dog owners to do four things now:

1. Do not support or contribute money to any organization that will participate on the task force, hires lobbyists to negotiate with HSUS or which supports the concept of a task force. It is absurd to have a task force based on the fraud of solving nonexistent problems. The only result will be to steal the rights of dog owners through a Devil's compromise in some form.
2. If you belong to a club or organization representing dog owners on the local, state or national level, please contact its officers immediately and ask them to withdraw all support for the task force or negotiations with HSUS. Instead, ask them to have their lobbyists concentrate only on informing the senators and representatives of the facts and encouraging them to vote against HSUS-anointed legislation.
3. Immediately contact members of the House Agriculture and Conservation Committee and ask them to oppose SJR 56. Please clearly state your reasons why. Here is a link for contact information for all members of the House Agriculture and Conservation Committee: 4. Please contact your own state representative and ask him or her to refuse to concur with SJR 56, and state your reasons. Here is a link to contact information:
5. And please join at least one organization that is fighting for your rights.

If enough Illinois dog owners take these actions, we can restore unity and defeat HSUS-inspired legislation. If you fail to act now, your rights to own and enjoy your dogs are doomed.

Our unity was broken when four dog owners'groups in Illinois hired or supported lobbyists to negotiate with HSUS and agents of Rep. John A. Fritchey and Sen. Dan Kotowski. Negotiations were held every Thursday for more than a month, and are ongoing on a more informal "hidden backroom" level. The result was the creation of the task force, which was the HSUS "Plan B"strategy.

We want to emphasize that most of the groups supporting lobbyists who negotiated with HSUS are among the good guys, who believe in and defend the rights of dog owners. These are good people who are on our side, but we simply think they were manipulated by HSUS into agreeing to the task force. In particular, we admire lobbyist George Fleischli of the Illinois Association of Outdoor Resources, who is helping Illinois Brittany owners and field trial clubs.

Please do not attack good people simply because they make an occasional mistake. They deserve our continued support and loyalty.

Instead, please ask them to join our efforts to restore unity and stop SJR 56 in its tracks. We need their help.
The American Sporting Dog Alliance represents owners, breeders and professionals who work with breeds of dogs that are used for hunting. We also welcome people who work with other breeds, as legislative issues affect all of us. We are a grassroots movement working to protect the rights of dog owners, and to assure that the traditional relationships between dogs and humans maintains its rightful place in American society and life. The American Sporting Dog Alliance also needs your help so that we can continue to work to protect the rights of dog owners. Your membership, participation and support are truly essential to the success of our mission. We are funded solely by your donations in order to maintain strict independence.
Please visit us on the web at . Our email is .

Thursday, May 14, 2009

TX- HB 3180 "Puppymill Bill"

May 13, 2009
There's a lot of confusion regarding what's happening at the Texas State Legislature. RPOA can't broadcast all we're doing but will send alerts when we need your help with clear instructions. FORGET ABOUT HB 2310.

Call and tell your senator you are passionate about your animals and will not vote for him if he votes for HB 3180 nor will you financially support him/her in the future!

The bill that has been received in the Senate is HB 3180 and that is the bill we MUST DEFEAT. The Engrossed Version of HB 3180 that passed on the House Floor is on the state's website:

As you know from past experience, all rules can be suspended and this bill could be passed in record time. So get on the horn! We can still kill this bill if each of you contact your senator and explain that this bill is not about "puppymills" at all.

It takes 21 Senate votes to get it to a Floor Vote. That is out of 31 senators. So let's get busy. We can do this! Just a couple more weeks to go.
Ask your senator how he or she is going to vote and let us know. It's a good idea to start contacting Governor Rick Perry -- just in case.

Find out who represents you:

Some talking points are below:
HB 3180, the misnamed "Puppymill Bill," by Thompson

* Will our senators stand up to the political powers in Austin to do what is right or will they let pet owners down as the House did? Do they own pets now and hope to own pets in the future?

* If every dog and cat in Texas is sterilized (as mandated in Senator Van de Putte's bill) and breeders face overly restrictive regulations (as in Representative Thompson's bill), where will pets come from in the future?

* Animal owners all over the country have their eyes on Texas to see how our legislators vote this session on anti-pet bills.

* HB 3180 is being sold as a "Puppymill" Bill and it is not. It regulates anyone that sells a dog or cat in the state whether they bred it or not, even rescuers. This is a big misconception.

* This is a radical national legislative agenda from Humane Society of the U.S. (HSUS) who have no connection to local humane societies. HSUS is an "animal rights" organization opposed to all use of animals for food, clothing, medical research, entertainment, including pet "ownership," preferring to call us pet "guardians.

* This bill will not stop anything as there are already strict animal cruelty laws in Texas and USDA regulates brokers and commercial breeders who sell to pet shops. Raids are made and animals seized on a regular basis in substandard facilities.

* HSUS uses sad pictures to sell all their legislation which is never written as publicized. The general public has no idea what is in this bill. They will find out eventually.

* Chapter 803. Dog and Cat Dealers; Subchapter A. General Provisions; Sec. 803.002. Definitions. In this chapter: (6) "Dealer means a person who is required to collect sales tax for the sale of animals to a retail purchaser. The term does not include a humane society or local animal control authority."
If this were a public health and safety issue as claimed, humane societies and animal controls should have to be classified as "dealers" also.

* "Commercial Breeder is defined as a person who possesses adult intact female animals that produce 20 or more litters in one calendar year and is engaged in the business of breeding animals for sale."
This will be a bureaucratic nightmare to enforce.

* The bill sets up a whole new expensive state bureaucracy for regulations and enforcement in a time of economic downturn all across the country.

* "Registered Breeder Inspector means an individual employed and certified by the department to conduct investigations and inspections under this chapter."

This can be "animal rights" zealots like those who dressed as Klansmen and demonstrated at the Westminster Dog Show or the PETA members who demonstrate at every zoo, rodeo and circus protesting the use of animals.

Do we want these radical extremists coming into our homes for inspections and investigations?

I don't think so!

RPOA Texas Outreach (501C4 Nonprofit)
Responsible Pet Owners Alliance (501C3 Nonprofit)

IL- Proposed 5 dog limit in City
Originally posted: May 13, 2009

Chicago alderman: Let's have a five dog limit in city
Posted by Dan Mihalopoulos at 6:50 p.m.

Chicago pet owners would not be allowed to have more than five dogs in their homes under a new City Council proposal.

Ald. Ray Suarez (31st) introduced the ordinance to cap pooch occupancy at today's council meeting. He said a majority of aldermen---27 out of 50---quickly indicated their support.

"There are a lot of people who can't enjoy their backyards because of irresponsible dog owners," he said.

The proposal was prompted, Suarez said, by a recent case of 11 dogs at one house in his Northwest Side ward. The alderman alleged that the stench of doggie doo-doo made neighbors barking mad.

"It smells really bad, especially in the summer," Suarez said.

He quickly added that he didn't want to be labeled anti-canine for his latest legislative effort. "We have a dog who is like a member of the family," he explained.

The ordinance will be debated by the council's License Committee. A date for that public hearing has not yet been set.

Monday, May 11, 2009

TX- Breeder Regulatory Legislation is now very close to becoming LawBecause of procedural maneuvering in the Texas Legislature, harsh

Because of procedural maneuvering in the Texas Legislature, harsh
breeder regulatory legislation is now very close to becoming law in the
Lone Star State. It is vital that all concerned responsible dog
breeders and owners in Texas take immediate action in opposition to this

On Wednesday, May 6, Senator Tommy Williams of The Woodlands had House
Bill 2310
considered, which originally concerned the powers and duties
of the Texas Department of Licensing and Regulation
. HB 2310 already
passed the House of Representatives, and was being considered by the
full Senate. Then, while the bill was being considered, Senator John
of Houston, the chief sponsor of Senate Bill 1910, which seeks
to impose harsh regulations and limits on responsible dog breeders
had until now received little attention from the Texas Senate, moved to
amend CSHB 2310, adding the same harsh breeder regulatory language to
this bill. The amendment was accepted.
In short order, the Senate's
rules were suspended, allowing the full Senate to put the newly-amended
HB 2310 up for a final vote. The Senate voted unanimously in favor of HB
2310. (Click here for the Texas Senate Journal's entry detailing the
actions taken on HB 2310.)

These procedural moves effectively prevented concerned Texans from
exercising their right to speak out about this legislation. Now, the
bill will be sent back to the Texas House of Representatives for final
approval, also known as concurrence. AT THIS CRITICAL JUNCTURE, IT IS

If enacted, the amended HB 2310 will negatively affect many responsible
breeders in Texas. The AKC opposes these changes including the following

* Defining "commercial breeder" as a person who possesses 11 or
more adult intact female animals and is engaged in the business of
breeding animals for direct or indirect sale or for exchange in return
for consideration.

* Requiring licensure of anyone considered a commercial breeder.

* Limiting commercial breeders from possessing more than 50 adult
intact female animals in a facility at any time.


It is imperative that all concerned Texans immediately contact their
member of the House of Representatives. Urge them to not concur with
the Senate's amendments to HB 2310. To find your Representative, go to and enter your information.

Contact Governor Rick Perry in opposition to this bill now.
Respectfully yet strongly let him know that you oppose HB 2310, and
insist that he veto this bill.

> Office of the Governor Rick Perry
> Mailing Address:
> P.O. Box 12428
> Austin, Texas 78711-2428
> Delivery Address:
> State Insurance Building
> 1100 San Jacinto
> Austin, Texas 78701
> Citizen's Opinion Hotline [for Texas callers]: (800) 252-9600
> Fax: (512) 463-1849
> To e-mail Governor Perry's office, go to
>, click "I am registering my
> opinion", click "Submit", complete the information on the following
> page, and click "Submit".

It's Where the Obama's Didn't Purchase Their Pup That Matters

It's Where the Obama's Didn't Purchase Their Pup That Matters
By Steve Dale

No, they didn't get a shelter dog. So what?

The First Family's First Puppy is as pure bred as they come, a Portuguese Water Dog named Bo, a gift from Senator Ted Kennedy's family, who have three Portuguese Water Dogs of their own.
By accepting 6-month old Bo, who had been returned to the breeder by another family, you'd think animal rights (AR) groups would be pleased with the President's choice Instead, PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) and the Humane Society of the United States were sharply critical of Obama because he didn't adopt a shelter dog, as if somehow dogs in shelters are suffering only because Obama chose a dog from a breeder.
To be absolutely clear - adopting a shelter animal is one way ordinary people can do something extraordinary, it's relatively inexpensive and you may potentially be saving a life. It's a great thing to adopt a shelter animal. However, I'm sick and tired of the AR groups blaming responsible breeders for the ills of animal shelters, as if they are somehow to blame for too many animals being given up and too few being adopted.
When I began writing this column nearly 15 years ago, most people considered shelter dogs and cats damaged goods, and were reluctant to adopt. That false perception is no longer accepted as fact. Shelter adoptions are up, and in many places way up. In fact, today, some communities even have shortages of adoptable dogs, so they 'import' them from other cities, counties or states where there's an abundance in packed shelters. Meanwhile, spay/neuters are up, and overpopulation is down in many parts of America. A complex web of caring volunteers rescue pure-bred dogs and pedigreed cats, yanking them from shelters (freeing space there for others), and bringing those rescued into home environments to be adopted.
When you subtract the dogs and cats considered unadoptable for behavior and/or health reasons, we're doing better than ever when it comes to adoptions. Still, YES YES YES - absolutely too many animals languish and die in shelters. I'm not disregarding that tragic fact.
Unfortunately, animal rights (AR) organizations have blasted Obama for not choosing a shelter dog. Obama's not alone. Joe Biden was attacked for purchasing a pure bred German Shepherd dog. In fact, according to these extreme AR groups, anyone who purchases a pure bred dog or pedigreed cat from a breeder is considered to be directly responsible animals dying in shelters. That leap of faith is simply wrong.
Pets purchased from conscientious breeders rarely land in shelters because, according to most contracts they must be spayed or neutered, and if anything goes wrong those pets are supposed to be returned to the breeder. That's exactly what happened to the Obama puppy that unfortunately turned out to be a poor fit for his first home. He was returned to the breeder, rather than dumped at the door of a shelter. If somehow, some way that puppy did land in a shelter, Portuguese Water Dog Rescue would have saved him.
In fact, the AR groups have it backwards - responsible breeders are a part of the solution, not a part of the problem. The problems begin with the idiots who breed animals for all the wrong reasons, they don't belong to a breed club or consider genetics in their haphazard breeding; they simply hope to make a buck.
Totally at fault are the pet stores (whose supplies are from puppy mills and commercial warehouses) selling to anyone who has cash (credible breeders are discerning and interview perspective buyers).
Most of all, according to data, here are reasons animals most often land in shelters: it's owners who can't deal with a behavior problem and can't find or don't bother to seek suitable help; relocate but without taking the pet; people who rent an apartment or buy a condo where pets aren't allowed but are soon discovered so the pet losses; or increasingly they simply can no longer afford to maintain the pet. Increasingly, lots of dogs are confiscated from gangs and other 'bad guys.'
Dealing with all these issues is what we should all be working on - not worrying about the breeders who are acting responsibly.
If the AR groups literally had their way - based on their own statements - there would be no breeding whatsoever. Their mantra is to advocate all breeders go away and that each and every animal is "Bob Barkerized" (spayed or neutered). If that were to literally happen, Maine Coon cats would soon be as endangered as the Cheetah; and American Cocker Spaniels or, for that matter, Portuguese Water Dogs would be as threatened as the African Wild Dog.
Made to feel guilty, and pushed to do positive PR, the Obama's will make a contribution the Washington (D.C.) Humane Society. That's nice. But the Obama's have nothing to feel guilty about. If you purchase a dog from a pet store or a reckless breeder, now you should feel guilty. But that is not what the Obama's did. In fact, they didn't make any purchase since Bo was a gift from the Kennedy family. Rescuing an animal from a shelter is good, but so is choosing a loving and responsible breeder - these two choices are not mutually exclusive.

Thursday, May 7, 2009

NY- Strict Breeders Bill introduced in New York State Senate

New Strict Breeders Bills Introduced In New York State Senate

[Friday, May 01, 2009]
Two new bills in the New York State Senate would severely limit the operations of responsible dog breeders in the Empire State. The American Kennel Club opposes these bills, and strongly encourages all concerned responsible dog breeders and owners in New York to contact the members of the Senate Agriculture Committee, which currently has cognizance of both bills, and respectfully express their opposition to the bills.

Senate Bill 4515 would require the registration and regulation of animal breeders. SB 4515 features many problematic provisions, including:

•Defining "breeder" as any person who breeds three or more animals for sale per year for profit. Any person defined as a "breeder" will be required to obtain a breeder license annually. The definition exempts from the definition duly incorporated humane societies. The threshold contained in this definition is overbroad and will apply the vast majority of dog breeders, thereby making enforcement impossible.

•Imposing stringent engineering requirements for animals' primary enclosures. As currently worded, these strict requirements will apply to all locations where dogs are housed, including the private residences of those classified as a 'breeder' under this law. This will potentially require thousands of dollars in extensive upgrades to be made to some individuals' residences.

•Mandating twice-a-year inspections of breeders' facility to be conducted at the breeder's expense. This additional, undefined fee could significantly the resources breeders need for caring for their animals. Additionally, due to the low threshold contained in the definition of "breeder" listed above, the number of inspections required under this new law will create an enforcement nightmare for New York state officials.

•Limiting "pet dealers" in New York to obtaining dogs only from New York State licensed "breeders." This requirement will inhibit many responsible purebred dog breeding programs by arbitrarily limiting operations; and will affect the health of many breeding programs by unreasonably and arbitrarily limiting gene pool diversity.

Senate Bill 4690 seeks to impose ownership limits and allow seizure of certain animals. The AKC opposes the following measures in SB 4690:

•Limit any person from owning more than 50 unsterilized dogs. The AKC believes that numerical limits do not address the underlying issues of responsible ownership and proper dog care. Additionally, this definition does not exclude dogs under a certain age; as such, many responsible purebred dog breeders could inadvertently exceed this arbitrary limit by having several large litters.

•Allow any police officer, any agent or officer of the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, or any agent or officer of any duly incorporated society for the prevention of cruelty to animals to seize dogs kept in violation of the proposed 50 dog limit if certain due process requirements are met. The bill does not detail the fate of animals seized pursuant to this bill.

•Amend the existing definition to "pet dealer" to include any person who engages in the sale or offering for sale of more than nine animals per year for profit at wholesale or to the public, including breeders who sell animals directly to consumers or at wholesale. By expanding this definition, more New Yorkers will be required to adhere to the many statutory provisions required of pet dealers in New York.


Concerned New Yorkers are strongly encouraged to contact the members of the Senate Agriculture Committee listed below. Respectfully yet strongly let them know that you oppose both Senate Bill 4515 and Senate Bill 4690, and urge them to do the same.

New York Senate Agriculture Committee:

Senator Darrel J. Aubertine, Chairman
Room 903,Legislative Office Building
Albany, New York 12247
Phone: (518) 455-2761

Senator William T. Stachowski
Room 802,Legislative Office Building
Albany, NY 12247
Phone: (518) 455-2426
Fax: (518) 426-6851

Senator Velmanette Montgomery
Room 306, Legislative Office Building
Albany, NY12247
Phone: (518) 455-3451
Fax: (518) 426-6854

Senator Neil D. Breslin
Room 502, Capitol Building
Albany, NY 12247
Phone: (518) 455-2225
Fax: (518) 426-6807

Senator David J. Valesky
Room 416, Capitol Building
Albany, New York 12247
Phone: (518) 455-2838
Fax: (518) 426-6885

Senator Catharine M. Young
Room513, Legislative Office Building
Albany, New York 12247
Phone: (518) 455-3563
Fax: (518) 426-6905
To e-mail Senator Young, click here.

Senator James L. Seward
Room711B, Legislative Office Building
Albany, NY 12247
Phone: (518) 455-3131
To e-mail Senator Seward, click here.

Senator George H. Winner, Jr.
Room415, Legislative Office Building
Albany, NY 12247
Phone: (518) 455-2091
Fax: (518) 426-6976
To e-mail Senator Winner, click here.

Senator Michael Ranzenhofer
Room315, Legislative Office Building
Albany, NY 12247
Phone: (518) 455-3161
Fax: (518) 426-6963
To e-mail Senator Ranzenhofer, click here.

For more information, contact AKC's Government Relations Department at (919) 816-3720, or e-mail

CT- SB 499 Bad News For Responsible Dog Breedres

URGENT: Connecticut SB 499 Bad News For Responsible Dog Breeders

[Monday, May 04, 2009]
On Thursday, April 30, Connecticut Senate Bill 499, which seeks to impose several changes to Connecticut's consumer protection laws, passed the state's Senate with burdensome last-minute amendments. The bill is now in the House of Representatives. While the American Kennel Club (AKC) supports reasonable consumer protection laws that protect both puppy purchasers and responsible dog breeders, the changes contained in SB 499 are not reasonable. As such, the AKC and the Connecticut Dog Federation, both strongly oppose SB 499 as currently written. Because this bill may be considered tomorrow, all concerned responsible dog breeders and owners in Connecticut are strongly urged to immediately contact their state representative. Let them know that you oppose SB 499 as currently written, and urge them to do the same.

The American Kennel Club supports reasonable laws and regulations intended to protect the pet-buying public in obtaining a sound dog of the breed represented. Breeders and/or sellers should be responsible for providing certain refunds, replacements or reimbursements should the dog sold become ill or die from a condition contracted prior to purchase. Such remedies should be conditioned upon the buyer's scrupulous adherence to the care and feeding program prescribed by the breeder and/or seller, as well as a timely examination by a state-licensed veterinarian once the puppy has gone to its new home. Breeders and/or sellers should provide buyers with a written bill of sale detailing the responsibilities of both the buyer and seller. This bill of sale should also detail any exclusions to refunds, replacements or reimbursements.

As currently written, Senate Bill 499 includes several provisions that go far beyond any measure of reasonableness, including:

•Requiring anyone who breeds two or more litters a year to have each puppy being sold examined by a veterinarian prior to the initial offering for sale, and examined every 15 days after the initial examination. The AKC believes that the provision requiring additional veterinary examinations every 15 days after the initial examination, regardless of whether a puppy is in sound health, is burdensome and unreasonable, and does not take into consideration the potential length of time responsible breeders may keep a puppy—in many instances, several months—prior to sale.

•Directing all sellers of dogs to file a certificate of origin with the Department of Agriculture within two days of sale, or otherwise be subject to a $100 fine, 30 days imprisonment, or both. The AKC argues that not only is this provision unreasonable, but if enacted, would create an enforcement nightmare of Connecticut's Department of Agriculture, which will be required to enforce this provision.

•Limiting kennel licensees from purchasing a dog or cat for resale from a breeder or other person, firm, or corporation located outside Connecticut that is not in possession of a current license issued by the USDA and any applicable state agency. This provision is both unreasonable and unenforceable because the various states have different breeder licensing regimes; as such, many breeders will not be able to meet the requirement of being licensed by both the USDA and a state. Additionally, the AKC believes that this provision opens the door to limiting the acquisition of all dogs from sources from outside Connecticut, regardless of intended purpose. This may result in many responsible breeders in Connecticut not being able to acquire appropriate dogs for their breeding programs from outside of Connecticut.


All concerned responsible dog breeders and owners in Connecticut are strongly urged to immediately contact their state representative. Let them know that you oppose SB 499 as currently written, and urge them to do the same. Click here to find your legislator.

If your Representative is a Democrat, please call the House Democrats at (860) 240-8500. If your Representative is a Republican, please call the House Republicans at (860) 240-8700. Ask for your Representative by name. Tell them that you are calling about SB 499 and respectfully let them know that you oppose the bill.

For tips on how to effectively communicate with legislators, click here.

For a copy of our Disagree Diplomatically brochure, click here.

For more information, contact AKC's Government Relations Department at (919) 816-3720, or e-mail

AKC's new Legislative Tracking

The AKC now has a clickable map of the US where they are tracking Legislative issues. This site is located Here