Dogs quarantined; many die

Dogs quarantined; many die
By Larry Clifton

An offer to provide refuge for 222 puppies and dogs from Puerto Rico for four days in their air-conditioned warehouse in Bushnell has cost Ronnie and Linda Graves, founders of Sumter Disaster Animal Response Team (DART) between $50,000 and $75,000 and taxed the stamina of a group of dedicated DART volunteers.

The animals were supposed to be disease free, at least four months old and 10 pounds or less in weight, according to Ronnie Graves, but that was found not to be the case upon their arrival.

A report by Brenda Eggert Brader, spokeswoman for the Florida Veterinary Medical Association (FVMA), states that the dogs ranged in age from 4 weeks to greater than 1 year when they arrived.

Since Aug. 30, Sumter DART volunteers in Bushnell, a handful of Florida veterinarians and University of Florida veterinarians have battled to contain an explosive epidemic of distemper and parvovirus that, as of Sept.22, claimed the lives of 107 of the dogs and puppies.

Allegedly the animals were vaccinated and wormed in Puerto Rico, however fecal exams showed that many dogs, particularly the youngest puppies, also carried coccidia, roundworm, and hookworm parasite infestations, according to the FVMA report.

Several calls made Tuesday to the Puerto Rico PAWS shelter were not returned by press time.

The puppies and dogs were en route to Yonkers, N.Y., to be distributed to various PetSmart stores for an “adopt-a-thon;” the trip included a scheduled two-day layover in Bushnell.

The Puerto Rico Animal Welfare Society (PAWS) shelter in Isabela, that shipped the dogs was one of 50 shelters across the U.S. competing in an ASCPA contest to win $100,000 and a second grant of $25,000 to be awarded to the shelter with largest adoption participation.

DART had agreed to transport and care for the animals for the hastily planned two-day layover in Bushnell. Hurricane Earl was set to come ashore in Puerto Rico a day after the animals were flown out on a cargo plane to Orlando where DART picked them up.

This is a situation where so many have stepped up to contribute so much to save the lives of the dogs that it is humbling to be a part of it all, said Connie Brooks, director of Sumter DART.

“As the puppies came off our truck, it became apparent that the minimum age requirement stipulated in the agreement had not been met,” said Brooks.

“Many of the puppies were just starting to open their eyes and were obviously only weeks old,” said Brooks.

The Puerto Rico PAWS animal shelter was reportedly “running in first place” to win the ASPCA cash award for a national adoption campaign sponsored by PetSmart when PAWS veterinarian Dr. Gwen Davis contacted DART to assist by sheltering and transporting the animals her organization had rounded up in Puerto Rico for the contest, according to Brooks.

But according to Graves, there was an agreement that all animals were free of infectious diseases, weighed no more than 10 pounds and were at least four months old.

Instead, the Puerto Rican PAWS facility shipped a mixture of animals that included larger dogs, puppies only a few weeks old and many that were infected by distemper and parparvovirus, said Graves.

The total estimated cost of medical care, medical testing and all other related expenses to various organizations right now is $185,000, he said.

Sumter DART called the state veterinarian association immediately after DART volunteers began unloading the puppies and an immediate quarantine was ordered, according to Graves.

DART volunteers have worked tirelessly during the crisis and Bushnell veterinarians Dr. Shannon Kennedy offered his services from day one and even helped clean their cages, said Brooks.

Dr. Cynda Crawford of Maddie’s Shelter Medicine Program and UF VETS became an on-site consultant during the state-ordered quarantine and stayed in Bushnell for a week to care for the animals, said Brooks.

According to a report by the Florida Veterinary Medical Association (FVMA), as of Sept. 22, 53 healthy dogs determined to be free of distemper or parvo were transported to the Florida SPCA in Orlando to be adopted and 20 had been adopted from that location.

Thirty-three of the youngest puppies testing positive for distemper but clinically well were transferred to six veterinarians across central Florida who graciously agreed to care for them under isolation conditions until they recover, according to the FVMA report.

Twenty-nine more dogs infected with distemper were accepted in isolation in Altamonte Springs, by Dr. Bruce Keene.

As of the FVMA report, 115 of the 222 dogs are still alive and have a chance at recovering and being adopted.

“I work with volunteers and I am a volunteer, but I haven’t seen so many step up for so long in quite a while,” said Brooks, as tears clouded her eyes. The people in this community have simply been wonderful, I can’t say enough about the support we have received from volunteers working twenty-hour days to the veterinarians, and everyone else.

For his part, Graves said even local restaurants contributed, adding, “Odd Couples on County Road 48 sent over about 50 fajita wraps and even made the volunteers a pineapple cake.”

Putting animals with highly contagious diseases together in cages is the easiest way to create a disease epidemic, according to Graves, who hopes that other rescue organizations can learn from the Puerto Rican dog quarantine.

What happened in Bushnell is a lot of wonderful volunteers and people came together and contributed their valuable time and resources to save the lives of a lot of animals as they were being decimated by two of the most deadly canine diseases, said Graves.


Sumter County Times article

Spread the word- If you support animals- don't support HSUS

The Truth About HSUS from Missourians for Animal Care Coalition
YouTube video

YouTube video 2
Can YOU imagine a life without a pet? The Humane Society of the United States is actively working on laws to make pet ownership a thing of the past. If you support animals, don't support HSUS. Don't be misled by HSUS- they are NOT for animals

Should You Surgically Debark Your Dog?

In this country it seems we are always faced with how to regulate morality. I put debarking in this class. Although the AR groups claim it is "inhumane", I can not buy that argument. I have witnessed this surgical procedure done and feel that if this surgery is deemed "inhumane"- then there are far more surgeries and procedures that we do to ourselves, our children, and yes- even our pets- that we should also label "inhumane". No, I think that the question of debarking is a moral question- not a "humane" question.

This article addresses the pros and cons of surgical debarking and also addresses the arguments people have that are for or against the procedure. This author concludes it should be a last resort, but still be allowed. I think it should be the decision of the owner. Personally, I think issue of "humanity" involve being a good neighbor. There is a lot of talk about dogs needing to use their bark to warn people of impending danger- but what about the dog who "crys wolf" (you do know that story don't you?)- You know, the dog that barks incessantly at the squirrels at the neighbors bird feeder, the dog barks so much that no one would believes them anyway, even if there was an intruder entering the neighbors house instead of just another squirrel. If a person wants to surgically debark their dog so that they can co-exist peacefully in a residential neighborhood, and still keep the dog they love, well I think that should be their own decision.

Should You Surgically Debark Your Dog?
Linda Cole
February 21, 2010

Debarking, or bark softening, saves lives and helps neighbor relations

By Charlotte Clem McGowan, a dog show judge for the American Kennel Club and author of "The Shetland Sheepdog in America." She has been a hobby dog breeder for more than 40 years.

I have debarked dogs for decades. Debarking has made it possible to keep my dogs in a residential neighborhood and be a good neighbor. A skilled surgeon can debark a dog in a very simple procedure using an adenoid punch to make a tiny hole in each vocal chord. This method is virtually bloodless. The dog recovers quickly and is not stressed by the surgery. The dog will not be silent, but his bark will be reduced in pitch and volume.

Breeds like shelties were used to keep livestock out of gardens, to keep birds of prey from taking lambs and as guards and alarms. They are very, very talkative. Shelties bark for all kinds of reasons, including joy. They also bark with a generally high-pitched, piercing bark that can be extremely annoying. Debarking takes them from annoying to manageable. Since shelties, by nature, will bark at birds and squirrels and while playing and having fun, keeping shelties in any number larger than one is difficult.

Veterinarians provide a valuable service with debarking. A dog that can bark at squirrels and while playing without being constantly disciplined is a happy dog. The urge to bark does not diminish, but the noise level does. The chief reason shelties are dumped in shelters is barking. Sheltie rescuers can easily re-home these dogs when they are debarked. So debarking saves lives.

While some people believe you can train any dog not to bark, I know from 40 years of extensive experience with shelties that this is not true. Some dogs just bark to bark.

More information at http://www.naiaonline.org/body/articles/archives/debark_qna.htm

Spay/neuter..... not so fast

A Healthier Respect for Ovaries - a research study conducted by David J. Waters, DVM,PhD, Diplomate ACVS reveals shortened longevity as a possible complication associated with ovary removal in dogs.

Thank you Dr. for doing a study to show that spaying dogs at an early age (less than 4 years of age) will significantly decrease the life of a female dog. Really, is keeping track of your girl for a few weeks every 6 months so difficult? Is convenience worth more than a few more years with your dog? Not for me. Spaying and neutering causes serious "complications"- ie DEATH.

Cass Sunstein- As Radical as they Come

On September 10th, while the Nation focuses on the health care debate, Cass Sunstein was confirmed as the Administrator of the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs. If you think this Radical (with a capital R) was confirmed narrowly by a Democrat majority- look again- only 6 Republicans voted against him!

What is so Radical about Sunstein?
1. He has written a book advocating Animal Rights in which he suggests that animals should be allowed to sue human beings in courts of law.
2. He believes we should all be vegetarians
3. He believes hunting should be banned

He represents a segment of society who feels that Americans should be regulated more! People like him should NOT be in government.

The American Conservative Union started a website Stop Sunstein - looks like it didn't help.

Quote of the Day

"Clever crooks seize power by small steps so as not to waken the populace before the time is right to put their plans into effect. Americans, or some Americans, are witnessing that now." Dorothy A. Seese, 2005

(disclaimer:Dorothy Seese is Not and AR activist (that I know of) and this quote was Not a direct reference to the AR agenda)

Act Now: Ask your Senator to stop Sunstein's nomination for Regulatory Czar

Radical Animal Rights Attorney Cleared
To Become Obama’s Regulatory Czar

Dog Owners, Hunters, Farmers Urged To Ask
Their Senators To Stop Sunstein Nomination

by JOHN YATES
American Sporting Dog Alliance
http://www.americansportingdogalliance.org
asda@csonline.net


WASHINGTON (July 21, 2009) – Sen. Saxby Chambliss (R-GA) has lifted his “hold” blocking the nomination of Harvard Law School scholar and animal rights legal strategist Cass Sunstein for the post of regulatory czar in the Administration of his close personal friend, President Barack Obama.

Sen. Chambliss had blocked the nomination based on concerns of farm groups because of Sunstein’s strong animal rights beliefs, including support of stringent regulation of people who raise animals and a ban on hunting. Last week, however, Chambliss met with Sunstein and announced on the Senate floor that he had lifted the hold on the nomination. The Senator added that the way is now clear for the U.S. Senate to confirm Sunstein before its August recess.

The American Sporting Dog Alliance is urging all dog owners, hunters, firearms rights advocates, farmers and civil libertarians to take immediate action by urging the U.S. Senate to reject the Sunstein nomination to head the powerful Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) in the White House. Taking action now is of the utmost urgency.
Sunstein has the strong support of the Humane Society of the United States, which is the political arm of the radical animal rights movement, according to a July 15 statement by HSUS Vice President and Chief Operating Officer Michael Markarian in The Huffington Post. Referring to the regulations to implement the federal Animal Welfare Act, and new rules about animal fighting and importing dogs, Markarian wrote: “These kinds of legal changes are precisely why Americans need a regulatory czar like Cass Sunstein in charge of OIRA -- to make sure the federal agencies properly implement regulations to enforce these new laws.”
The Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) “reviews and alters regulations created by federal agencies,” according to Congress Daily.

Sunstein, who has published 15 books, would have broad powers to review, recommend changes and possibly engineer changes in all federal regulations, including those about dog ownership, farming, hunting on federal lands, and enforcement of gun control laws.

In his published writings and speeches, Sunstein has advocated:

· Giving animal rights groups the power to file lawsuits on the behalf of animals against their owners.

· Very strict regulations about animal ownership, farming and hunting.

· The elimination of hunting.

· The elimination of the individual right to keep and bear arms.

· Moving toward a vegan vegetarian society.

· Rewriting the Constitution and Bill of Rights.

· And restrictions on free speech.

Each of those assertions will be documented later in this report by direct quotations from Sunstein’s published books and speeches.

The American Sporting Dog Alliance believes Sunstein would have a severely negative impact on dog owners, farmers, hunters, gun owners and civil libertarians – Indeed, to all Americans!

This is underscored by Sunstein’s status as a close personal friend and advisor to President Obama since they met in 1992, when Sunstein taught law at the University of Chicago. This will give Sunstein unprecedented influence and access to the President.

It is further underscored by numerous mainstream reports that Sunstein is slated to be President Obama’s next nominee to fill a vacancy on the Supreme Court. This adds to the urgency of convincing the Senate that Sunstein’s beliefs are un-American and in direct contradiction to the basic principles outlined in the Constitution and Bill of Rights.

Although Sunstein’s nomination had been blocked by Sen. Chambliss until last week, Government Executive reported that he actually has been working at the job in the White House on a daily basis.
Sunstein’s potential use of power – and potential abuse of power – has been increased because President Obama redefined the role of OIRA shortly after taking office. The Wall Street Journal reported July 6: “In a significant, but little noticed, memo written 10 days after taking office, Mr. Obama ordered up a rewrite of how OIRA goes about its work, the first such revision since 1993. ‘Far more is now known about regulation -- not only when it is justified, but also what works and what does not,’ the president wrote. A regulatory review would make use of new tools and would ‘clarify the role of the behavioral sciences in formulating regulatory policy.’ "
The Wall Street Journal called the OIRA “obscure but powerful.”
The American Sporting Dog Alliance believes that Sunstein will use this position to influence President Obama’s directives to all federal agencies on how to write, interpret and enforce all federal regulations. This includes regulations about agriculture, raising animals, hunting on public lands, and gun law enforcement and procedures. This is a dangerous power to be held by someone of Sunstein’s clearly radical and unconstitutional beliefs.
Thus, we are urging every American to immediately contact both of his or her U.S, senators, and as many other senators as possible, to urge them to vote against the Sunstein nomination.
This link will provide a search engine to locate each state’s senators, and an alphabetical list of the senators to link to contact information: http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm. Each state has two U.S. Senators who represent all of the citizens of that state.
We recommend at least two forms of contact: Send an email as a first step, plus also send a letter or fax, and/or make a phone call. Please do this immediately, as a Senate confirmation vote could come at any moment.
In addition, please send this report to all of your friends and contacts and ask them to help, and post it on any message boards that you use. Also, please write a letter to the editor of your local newspaper and any other papers you read.
Here are some direct quotes from Sunstein to illustrate our concern:
1. "We ought to ban hunting"
- Cass Sunstein, in a 2007 speech at Harvard University

2. “We should focus attention not only on the enforcement gap, but on the areas where current law offers little or no protection. In short, the law should impose further regulation on hunting, scientific experiments, entertainment, and (above all) farming to ensure against unnecessary animal suffering. It is easy to imagine a set of initiatives that would do a great deal here, and indeed European nations have moved in just this direction. There are many possibilities.”
--Cass R. Sunstein, “The Rights of Animals: A Very Short Primer,” John M. Olin
Law & Economics Working Paper No. 157, The Law School, The University of
Chicago

3. “…(R)epresentatives of animals should be able to bring private suits to ensure that
anticruelty and related laws are actually enforced. If, for example, a farm is treating
horses cruelly and in violation of legal requirements, a suit could be brought, on behalf of those animals, to bring about compliance with the law.”
--Cass R. Sunstein, “The Rights of Animals: A Very Short Primer,” John M. Olin
Law & Economics Working Paper No. 157, The Law School, The University of Chicago

4. “But if, as a practical matter, animals used for food are almost inevitably going to endure terrible suffering, then there is a good argument that people should not eat meat to the extent that a refusal to eat meat will reduce that suffering. Of course a legal ban on meat-eating would be extremely radical, and like prohibition, it would undoubtedly create black markets and have a set of bad, and huge, side-effects. But the principle seems clear: People should be much less inclined to eat meat if their refusal to do so would prevent significant suffering.”
--Cass R. Sunstein, “The Rights of Animals: A Very Short Primer,” John M. Olin
Law & Economics Working Paper No. 157, The Law School, The University of
Chicago

5. “Less modestly, anticruelty laws should be extended to areas that are now exempt from
them, including scientific experiments and farming. There is no good reason to permit the
level of suffering that is now being experienced by millions, even billions of living
creatures.”
--Cass R. Sunstein, “The Rights of Animals: A Very Short Primer,” John M. Olin
Law & Economics Working Paper No. 157, The Law School, The University of
Chicago

6. “Everything depends on whether and to what extent the animal in question is capable of suffering. If rats are able to suffer, then their interests are relevant to the question of how, and perhaps even whether, they can be expelled from houses.”
--Cass R. Sunstein, Martha C. Nussbaum. Animal Rights: Current Debates and
New Directions. (Oxford University Press, USA, 2004). P. 12

7. “A system of limitless individual choices, with respect to communications, is not
necessarily in the interest of citizenship and self-government.”
--Cass Sunstein, arguing for a Fairness Doctrine for the Internet in his book,
Republic.com 2.0 (Princeton University Press, 2007), p.137

8. “In what sense is the money in our pockets and bank accounts fully ‘ours’? Did we earn it by our own autonomous efforts? Could we have inherited it without the assistance of probate courts? Do we save it without the support of bank regulators? Could we spend it if there were no public officials to coordinate the efforts and pool the resources of the
community in which we live?... Without taxes there would be no liberty. Without taxes
there would be no property. Without taxes, few of us would have any assets worth
defending. [It is] a dim fiction that some people enjoy and exercise their rights without
placing any burden whatsoever on the public … There is no liberty without dependency. That is why we should celebrate tax day …”
-- Cass R. Sunstein, “Why We Should Celebrate Paying Taxes,” The Chicago
Tribune, April 14, 1999

9. “Much of the time, the United States seems to have embraced a confused and pernicious form of individualism. This approach endorses rights of private property and freedom of contract, and respects political liberty, but claims to distrust ‘government intervention’ and insists that people must fend for themselves. This form of so-called individualism is incoherent, a tangle of confusions.”
-- Cass R. Sunstein, The Second Bill of Rights: FDR’s Unfinished Revolution and
Why We Need it More Than Ever, Basic Books, New York, 2004, p. 3

10. “[A]lmost all gun control legislation is constitutionally fine. And if the Court is right,
then fundamentalism does not justify the view that the Second Amendment protects an
individual right to bear arms.”
- Cass Sunstein, writing in his book, “Radicals in Robes”

11. “…[T]he Second Amendment seems to specify its own purpose, which is to protect the"well regulated Militia." If that is the purpose of the Second Amendment (as Burger
believed), then we might speculate that it safeguards not individual rights but federalism.”
-- Cass R. Sunstein, “The Most Mysterious Right,” National Review, November
12, 2007

12. In his 2004 book The Second Bill of Rights: FDR’s Unfinished Revolution and Why We Need It More than Ever, Sunstein claims that “citizens’ rights exist only to the extent that they are granted by the government.”
Those views are why the American Sporting Dog Alliance adamantly opposes the Sunstein nomination. His track record is frighteningly consistent.
Thank you for helping.
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 http://www.americansportingdogalliance.org . Our email is asda@csonline.net .

PLEASE CROSS-POST AND FORWARD THIS REPORT TO YOUR FRIENDS

All Bark and Fiscal Bite- Are Breed-Discriminatory Laws Effective?

This article originally appeared in Vol. 18, No. 2 (Winter 2009) of PASS IT ON

All Bark and Fiscal Bite—Are Breed-Discriminatory Laws Effective?
by Ledy VanKavage A dog attacks, and city-council members want the city attorney to react—sometimes by drafting an ordinance that restricts or outlaws a specific breed of dog, most often the maligned pit bull.1 After such an ordinance is passed, authorities must then ferret out and kill any dog that slightly resembles a pit bull. Prince George’s County Maryland spends approximately $560,000 every two years enforcing its ban. Miami-Dade County impounds and kills around 800 pit bulls a year, despite a ban dating back to the 1980s, resulting in a significant fiscal impact.2

Given the tremendous costs associated with breed-discriminatory laws, are they a prudent approach to community safety or a costly red herring? With passage of such ordinances comes a host of questions such as: How do you prove in court the identity of a mixed-breed dog? What sort of training do your animal-control or law-enforcement officers have regarding breed identification? If they aren’t trained in breed identification, is a veterinarian employed to determine whether a dog is a certain breed? Now that DNA testing is available, are courts going to require the government to pay for such testing before confiscating and destroying citizens’ property (i.e., their dogs)?

Missing the Mark by Targeting Pit Bulls
Effective public lawyers counsel their clients to make decisions based on research and valid statistics, not emotion. So why the modern-day witch hunt concerning pit bulls? Karen Delise, author of “Fatal Dog Attacks” and “The Pit Bull Placebo,” examined news stories regarding dog attacks that occurred during four days in August 2007. The results are telling:
· On Aug. 18, 2007: A Labrador mix attacked a 70-year-old man, sending him to the hospital in critical condition. Police officers arrived at the scene, and the dog was shot after charging the officers. This incident was reported in one article and only in the local paper.
· On Aug. 19, 2007: A 16-month-old child received fatal head and neck injuries after being attacked by a mixed-breed dog. This attack was reported two times by the local paper.
· On Aug. 20, 2007: A 6-year-old boy was hospitalized after having his ear torn off and receiving severe bites to the head by a medium-sized mixed-breed dog. This attack was reported in one article and only in the local paper.
· On Aug. 21, 2007: A 59-year-old woman was attacked in her home while trying to break up a dog fight involving her neighbor’s Jack Russell terrier and two pit bulls. The pit bulls had broken off their chains and followed her neighbor’s Jack Russell terrier in through her dog door. She was hospitalized with severe injuries. Her dog was not injured. This attack was reported in more than 230 articles in national and international newspapers and on major television news networks, including CNN, MSNBC, and Fox.

Thus, during those four days, four dog attacks made the news—including a fatality involving a mixed-breed dog—but only the incident involving the pit bulls captured national attention.

Given the hype, it isn’t a surprise that public lawyers may be asked to research and draft ordinances to help stop dog attacks, with the focus frequently on banning pit bulls. However, a smarter approach is to examine the statistics in the community, seek citizen input and weigh the factors involved in the attacks.

Read the full story on the American Bar Association site.

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
5/27/09

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.

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.

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

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ta8GdABQPHA

WSB-TV Aftermath: The Knives Are Out At HSUS
By ESaunders AR-HR.com

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 AR-HR.com 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 http://AR-HR.com
All rights reserved

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
http://www.trendtrack.com/texis/cq/viewrpt?event=49bfaef9bd