Sportsmen's and = Animal Owners' Voting Alliance; SAOVA

Table of=20 Contents

Home

2004 Full = Endorsement=20 List

Receive =
Alert=20 & = News
Emails

NRA/Anti's Common=20 Endorsements

Results
To-Date

Links

SAOVA
Volunteers

Poll

VHDOA

ALERT: AKC-HSUS-Santorum S1139 Anti-Dog Owner = Bill
Detailed=20 Status Report and Action Plan

June 21, 2005 PAWS Update - minor more recent = changes shown in=20 green
Summary
In = the last=20 two weeks, this website registered over 2500 hits, as people = visited to=20 learn more about Sen. Rick Santorum's S1139 (PAWS) bill, the = Animal=20 Welfare Act (AWA) amendments jointly supported by the AKC, HSUS = and DDAL.=20 Those visitors now better understand that PAWS is a bill that = severely=20 threatens rescuers, sellers of dogs for hunting, security and = breeding=20 purposes, pedigreed cat owners and some dog breeders. Efforts to = convince=20 the AKC to drop its support for this bill have failed, although a = Board of=20 Directors' June 12th vote on the issue was a split one.

The = AKC has=20 mounted an aggressive defense of its PAWS actions on several = fronts. That=20 defense mischaracterizes the Washington political situation, the = need for=20 AWA amendments and the nature of AKC's collaboration with animal = rights=20 groups. More significantly, the AKC has failed to acknowledge its = reduced=20 ability to further influence PAWS's legislative development in = Congress or=20 the very specific, serious flaws in PAWS as it was introduced.=20 Fundamentally, the AKC refuses to admit that it abetted the = creation a=20 major problem for animal owners. Instead, it's stonewalled and = filled the=20 Internet with self-serving and misleading statements about=20 PAWS.

It's particularly telling that Dr. Carmen Battaglia, = a=20 well-known and respected figure in the dog world and an AKC = Director who=20 voted against the AKC's support of PAWS, has chosen to make his = concerns=20 with the registry's PAWS position and rationale public, contradicting the = AKC's=20 statements. His statement indicates the AKC's underlying = rationale is=20 flawed, the bill itself poorly written and dangerous and he urges = its=20 defeat.

A group of national animal organizations, other = registries,=20 breed clubs and state federations have announced their opposition = to PAWS.=20 HSUS = and DDAL=20 have launched concerted grass roots efforts to persuade = legislators to=20 cosponsor the measure and the battle has been joined.

The = materials=20 below discuss these matters more fully, SAOVA's second = communication with=20 the AKC's management and a request that hunting dog and other = animal=20 owners join in the revised Defeat S1139 (PAWS) Action Plan.

The current Washington political=20 scene
AKC's stated PAWS rationale is that Sen. = Santorum,=20 HSUS and DDAL were going to pass AWA legislation, with, or = without, its=20 support. Further, dog owners were better off with James Holt, = AKC's=20 consultant, working on the inside, rather than the outside, = objecting to=20 any bill. Setting aside the question of whether AKC proffered = goals=20 require new law and their overall importance to dog owners, AKC's=20 political premise is deeply flawed.

There is virtually no = chance=20 that PAWS can pass, without very much broader support. Its defeat = is=20 assured if organizations and individuals vigorously oppose it.=20 Conservative Republican Saxby Chambliss now chairs the Senate = Agriculture=20 Committee. In 2001-2002, during the consideration of Sen. = Santorum's last=20 puppy protection act (PPA2), Tom Harkin (D), an animal rights = supporter,=20 had the chair. The House Agriculture Committee continues to be = strongly=20 opposed to any animal rights radicalism. In 2001-2002, a = Democratic=20 controlled Senate Agriculture Committee attached PPA2 to the Farm = Bill and=20 the House conferees knocked it out. The Senate's dynamics have = totally=20 changed since 2002, to HSUS's and PAWS's detriment. Finally, Rick=20 Santorum's going to be defeated in his November 2006 reelection = effort. He=20 has the highest home state negatives of all 100 senators. He's = history,=20 not an ongoing threat. AKC's in the wrong game, for the wrong=20 reasons.

PAWS = Opposition
SAOVA's=20 June 7th call for an AKC Boycott due to its support of PAWS was = designed=20 to quickly attract attention to this measure and its likely severe = consequences for animal owners. We were successful in forcing the = AKC to=20 answer questions about its PAWS support and put that support to a = Board of=20 Directors vote on June 12th. Four of twelve directors voted = against=20 supporting PAWS, with a fifth objection not recorded due to an = illness=20 absence.

Those Delegate-Directors opposing PAWS include the = following

Dr. Carmen L. Battaglia - German Shepherd Dog = Club of=20 America
Thomas M. Davies, DVM - Springfield Kennel Club =
Ken Marden=20 - German Shorthaired Pointer Club of America
Asa Mays, DVM - = Hutchinson=20 Kennel Club (absent)
Patti Strand - Dog Fanciers Association = of=20 Oregon

Following that meeting, on the next day, ~450 AKC = club=20 delegates heard an extended, broad bush briefing praising PAWS = from James=20 Holt. There wasn't a single question asked, including the obvious = one of=20 why four legislation-knowledgeable directors had voted against = PAWS 24=20 hours earlier. Subsequently, the AKC launched a blizzard of press=20 releases, interviews, website postings and email exchanges in an = effort to=20 defend its role in PAWS and respond to some of the bill impact = criticisms=20 and its animal rightist partnership. It's clear that PAWS confuses = many=20 animal owners and AKC's efforts haven't been designed to overly = clarify or=20 acknowledge critical mistakes made during the bill's=20 negotiation.

The nature of AKC's commitment to Senator = Santorum,=20 HSUS and DDAL compounds the negotiating error problems. AKC, as a = party to=20 a negotiated bill and a committed supporter, can't seek further = changes in=20 PAWS, without HSUS and DDAL also having the opportunity ask for = their=20 unfilled objectives, putting animal owners at even greater risk. = AKC has=20 dug itself into a very deep PAWS hole, which is the subject of SAOVA's second AKC=20 communication.

Fortunately, the wide publicity given to = PAWS=20 since its introduction has generated considerable opposition. The list of = organizations=20 formally opposed to PAWS grows daily and currently numbers = 150+=20 groups, including twenty AKC parent breed clubs, eight state = federations=20 and twenty-two national pet related entities. AKC's PAWS support = has also=20 spawned a series of political=20 cartoons.

What are PAWS's = critical design=20 and language problems?

1. The term ''dealer'' = means=20 any person who buys, or sells any dog for hunting, security, or = breeding=20 purposes.

New AWA (PAWS) language shown in red and key = wording=20 highlighted in bold.

"The term ''dealer'' means any = person=20 who, in commerce, for compensation or profit, delivers for=20 transportation, or transports, except as a carrier, buys, or = sells,=20 or negotiates the purchase or sale of,
(1) any dog or other = animal=20 whether alive or dead for research, teaching, exhibition, or use = as a pet,=20 or
(2) any dog for hunting, security, or breeding = purposes, or=20
(3) any dog imported from outside the United States, unless = the dog is=20 imported by the person for the use and enjoyment of the person, =
except that this term does not = include-
(i) a=20 retail pet store except such store which sells any animals to a = research=20 facility, an exhibitor, or a dealer, or which sells any = dogs=20 imported from outside the United States; or
(ii) any person = who,=20 during any calendar year-
(I)(aa) sells not more than 25 dogs = or cats=20 at wholesale or to the public; or
(bb) does not whelp more than = 6=20 litters of dogs or cats and sells only dogs or cats bred or raised = on the=20 premises of the person directly at retail to persons who purchase = such=20 animals for their own use and enjoyment and not for resale; = and=20
(II) derives ...

Previously,=20 AWA's entire determination of who was a federally licensed dog = seller=20 ("dealer") hinged on the type of sale involved, wholesale or = retail.=20 PAWS's (3)(ii)(I)(aa)/(bb) discards that = regulatory=20 structure and substitutes one that requires that dealer = determinations be=20 based on numbers of dogs sold or litters bred, without regard to = wholesale=20 or retail sales.

It does this in an awkward, governmentese = way, by=20 exempting from licensing certain sized sellers (25 and fewer dogs = or=20 homebred litter production), rather than straightforwardly = defining the=20 licensed seller class. Most small breeders and dog resellers = probably=20 believe that they can live with the limits specified and don't = look=20 further.

The critical problem here is that AKC and the = animal=20 rightists HSUS and DDAL left provision (2) unchanged. =

The term=20 ''dealer'' means any person who buys, or sells any dog for = hunting,=20 security, or breeding purposes

That definition is = obviously in=20 conflict with a seller meeting the (3)(ii)(I)(aa) and (bb) = exemption=20 requirements. SAOVA, on behalf of its hunting dog owner = constituents,=20 would have few concerns with PAWS if provision (2) had been = deleted, as it=20 should have been. It amounts to a double licensing test to which = other=20 breed groups aren't subjected.

Mr. Holt and others at the = AKC have=20 replied to some of SAOVA's criticisms of PAWS through various = media, but=20 only Mr. Holt has spoken to me directly. His sole response was = that this=20 double licensing doesn't matter, it's always been that way, and = that Sen.=20 Santorum (HSUS) didn't want to change it. The reason that this = provision=20 hasn't been an active concern before today is that USDA took four = years to=20 write the (2) implementing rule and it wasn't until October 21, = 2004 that=20 the agency decided it would enforce this licensing requirement on=20 **only those dog owners selling to wholesalers.** If = the=20 AWA's determination of licensees based on wholesale-retail sales = is=20 abandoned in PAWS, that protracted decision making process is back = to=20 ground zero and *all* hunting dog sellers are again = potentially=20 subject to USDA licensing.

That risk would be eliminated if = PAWS=20 deleted (2). There's no need for it, if hunting dog sellers are to = treated=20 no differently than any other dog seller with numerically limited = sales,=20 the new licensing criteria. Why wasn't this done? Mr. Holt says = it's=20 because Sen. Santorum "didn't want to." That's not an acceptable = answer.=20 Where do you think he and HSUS are coming from here, except to = justify=20 writing more restrictive USDA licensing rules for sellers of = hunting,=20 security and breeding dogs?

2. Many, if not most, = rescuers are=20 federally licensed under PAWS

Rescuers are currently = not=20 required to have a federal license. This has nothing to do = with=20 their tax or non-profit status. There is no AWA "rescue = exemption." A=20 rescued animal placed in return for an adoption fee is considered = a sale=20 like any other, under the AWA and the U.S. Commercial Code. = Rescuers are=20 considered retail sellers, and as such, aren't today licensed. = PAWS, in=20 abandoning the wholesale-retail sales distinction, places rescuers = in the=20 same class as any other reseller. They are limited to 25 sales per = calendar year. A 26th placement by an individual rescuer or = organization=20 requires that entity be licensed.

3. Pedigreed cat = breeders are=20 destroyed by PAWS

AKC, in not consulting with any = other dog or=20 cat registry during PAWS's development, has aided in writing a = bill that=20 destroys pedigreed cat breeding. A pedigreed cat-breeding program = requires=20 frequent breeding to maintain the queens' health. No cat breeder = has ever=20 before been subject to AWA licensing. By including cats in the = PAWS=20 language above and establishing breeding and selling limits based = on=20 canines, AKC has risked destroying pedigreed cat = breeding.

Even if=20 you're not a cat lover, this should disturb hunting dog owners a = great=20 deal. The cat owners represented by the Cat Fancier's Association = (CFA)=20 have steadfastly supported our efforts to defeat anti-hunting = legislation=20 for years. This has been particularly true in California. They = were also=20 an integral part of the coalition that defeated Sen. Santorum's = PPA2. You=20 just don't do this to your friends. What goes around, comes = around. This=20 action raises serious questions regarding AKC's PAWS = goals.

4.=20 PAWS Enforcement Concerns

The AKC has ignored = questions about=20 all registries' need to share their registration database with the = USDA to=20 determine which dog owners exceed PAWS's numerical limits for dogs = sold=20 and litters raised. It's hard to imagine how else such a system = can be=20 enforced. It has been somewhat more forthcoming about its PAWS = business=20 objectives. The AKC continues to lose core business (registrations = for Jan=20 1- May 31, 2005 indicates dogs down 3.9% and litters down 4.6%) = and feels=20 it the pressure - "There are now 24 other registries out there, in = addition to the AKC, all but one of them for-profit operations.=20 Collectively, they register more dogs than the AKC does." as repor= ted=20 by Mr. Holt and CEO Dennis Sprung.

Mr. Holt's Dog = News Q&A=20 makes AKC's competitive goals even clearer. Not only does he = indicate=20 that the AKC believes separate standards should apply to so-called = PAWS=20 "high-volume residential breeders", he suggests that those federal = standards should be based on AKC's regulations. He further opines = that AKC=20 could/should do the federal inspections as a contractor to=20 USDA.

With regard to its competitive position, the AKC PAWS = spokesman states, "On the other hand, breeders who have left our = registry=20 because of our mandatory inspection program will now be inspected = whether=20 or not they register with us and will have less incentive to = leave, and=20 perhaps even some incentive to return in order to receive the = benefit of=20 AKC registration."

While PAWS supporters go on at length = decrying=20 hidden "puppy mills," Internet direct sellers and unregulated = importers,=20 there's been little to no factual documentation presented that = dogs from=20 these sources are any more unhealthy or less desirable pets from = those=20 obtained from other sources. In fact, the Internet has made dog = purchasers=20 smarter and more aware, not the opposite. AKC also permits its own = website=20 to be used for interstate puppy sales. Critical observers can't = help but=20 be concerned that the AKC's PAWS objectives might be financial and = competition focused, and only minimally canine welfare = related.

Defeat S1139 (PAWS) Action Plan=20

We need to turn our attention to the = Hill.=20 AKC's a lost cause at this point and HSUS/DDAL are pressing their = grass=20 roots supporters to make congressional contacts. Our initial, and = perhaps=20 final, target group will be the key aides of senators serving on = the=20 Agriculture Committee and the Agriculture Subcommittee of the=20 Appropriations Committee. It's a large group. To prevent = overwhelming the=20 staffs with what might appear to be broad spectrum spam, the = preaddressed=20 email below has the chiefs of staff of S1139's = (PAWS)=20 sponsors as primary recipients, and a large blind copy = list. Those=20 AKC directors supporting PAWS are also bcc'd as reminders that = they don't=20 represent us.

Be polite. These folks can help us defeat = PAWS. Use=20 the salutation "Dear Senate Agriculture Legislative Assistant," = Every=20 message must indicate that the AKC doesn't represent you in its = PAWS=20 lobbying. Add anything else that you wish describing PAWS's severe = problems.

PLEASE SURE TO CLOSE THE MESSAGE WITH YOUR NAME, = POSTAL=20 MAILING ADDRESS AND PHONE #. If you don't, your message will be = discounted=20 and perhaps totally ignored. You're also encouraged to telephone = the=20 committee staff. Agriculture (202) 224-2035, Appropriations AG=20 Subcommittee (202) 224-5270

Please=20 Vote NO on Sen. Santorum's and Durbin's S1139 (PAWS) Additionally, since PAWS is picking up misguided = support=20 outside of these key committees, please call or email your = individual two=20 senators and congressman and urge that they not cosponor S1139 or = HR2669.=20 See Vote Smart for your = representative's contact details. Forwarding, cross posting = and=20 citations encouraged. As additional information on S1139 & = HR2669's=20 status in Congress becomes available and specific action is = advised, this=20 page will be updated and SAOVA regional elist alerts = will be=20 emailed to you.

Help=20 support SAOVA's successful pro-active advocacy! Donate online = via=20

June 7, 2005

(AKC) has exposed rescuers, some hobby = breeders=20 and every seller of a dog for "hunting, security, or breeding = purposes" to=20 a very significant USDA licensing risk, involving burdensome = commercial=20 costs and inspection standards. On May 26th, the AKC announced = that it had=20 reached a *compromise* with the animal rightist Humane Society of = the U.S.=20 (HSUS) to amend the Animal Welfare Act (AWA), employing Senator = Rick=20 Santorum's (R-PA) S1139, "Pet Animal Welfare Statute of 2005" = (PAWS). Both=20 entities' press = releases =20 are heavily spun, focusing on importers or sellers advertising on = the=20 Internet and don't hint at the amendments' dangers to everyday dog = owners.=20 This is Sen. Santorum's third collaboration with HSUS to amend the = AWA's=20 pet statutes. The previous attempts failed and S1139 can not = become law=20 without the AKC's active support. Its defeat is assured if the = registry=20 joins with other organizations and individuals to vigorously = oppose it.=20

S1139 changes the AWA and USDA's existing, long-standing, = legally=20 tested basis for federal dog and cat business licensing and = regulation.=20 The current procedure is based on treating wholesale sales and = retail=20 sales differently. Reducing it to its simplest terms, under = current law=20 and USDA regulations, if you sell a dog to a wholesaler, you are=20 regulated. Rescuers, hobby breeders and owners selling to = retail buyers=20 are exempt today. The Doris Day Animal League challenged the = hobby=20 breeder portion of this regulatory structure in court and lost in = 2002.=20

The AKC-HSUS-Santorum AWA amendments change only a few key = words=20 in a very long statute, but their effect is profound. The critical = words=20 for breeders and hunting dog owners are highlighted below. The new = system,=20 in red, is strictly based on numbers of dogs, pups and litters = with sales=20 outlets playing a minimal role. A crucial current law fragment is=20 underlined. USDA concluded a rulemaking last October that = determined=20 *only wholesale* buyers and sellers of "dogs for = hunting,=20 security, or breeding purposes" would be licensed and inspected. = That=20 important victory has been ignored in S1139.

Rather than = including=20 that provision in line (2) and adjusting the new (I)(aa) 25-dog = sale limit=20 provision, as should have been done, line (2) wasn't changed and = (I)(aa)=20 doesn't recognized such dog sellers. This strongly suggests that = sellers=20 of dogs for hunting, security, or breeding purposes could well be=20 separately regulated as this amendment moves through the Congress = or in a=20 subsequent agency rulemaking. This S1139 disconnect is a trap = waiting to=20 be sprung.

For the first time, rescuers appear to = regulated, if=20 they exceed the new (I)(aa) 25-dog sale limit. The six-litter = exemption in=20 red line (I)(bb) is also misleading. This only applies to dogs = bred or=20 raised on the breeder's premises. Whelp four litters of 7 dogs, = resell=20 another, or sell a co-ownership in the same calendar year and = you've=20 voided that six-litter breeder exemption and violated the 25-dog = sale=20 limit. You're now subject to USDA licensing!!
-------
"The = term=20 ''dealer'' means any person who, in commerce, for compensation or = profit,=20 delivers for transportation, or transports, except as a carrier, = buys, or=20 sells, or negotiates the purchase or sale of,
(1) any dog or = other=20 animal whether alive or dead for research, teaching, exhibition, = or use as=20 a pet, or
(2) any dog for hunting, security, or breeding = purposes,=20 or [Emphasis added]
(3) any dog imported = from=20 outside the United States, unless the dog is imported by the = person for=20 the use and enjoyment of the person, except that this term does = not=20 include-
(i) a retail pet store except such store which = sells=20 any animals to a research facility, an exhibitor, or a dealer, = or which sells any dogs imported from outside the = United States;=20 or
(ii) any person who, during any calendar year-
(I)(aa) = sells=20 not more than 25 dogs or cats at wholesale or to the public; = or
(bb)=20 does not whelp more than 6 litters of dogs or cats and sells only = dogs or=20 cats bred or raised on the premises of the person directly at = retail to=20 persons who purchase such animals for their own use and enjoyment = and not=20 for resale; and
(II) derives not more than $500 gross income = from the=20 sale of other animals." [Emphasis = added]
-------
A dog=20 seller requiring a USDA license pays an annual fee of up to $760, = as a=20 function of gross income, must file an annual report, keep = voluminous=20 records and is subject to random inspections to determine = compliance with=20 60 = pages of care=20 standards, which include separate, sheltered facilities kept at a=20 temperature no lower than 45 deg F and no higher that 85 deg=20 F.

It's very clear that this numbers of dogs, numbers of = litters=20 based regulatory scheme is unenforceable unless the dog and cat = registries=20 give the USDA access to their registration data bases, or AKC, et = al act=20 as USDA agents and identify those customers that they think = deserve=20 federal scrutiny.

WHAT'S GOING ON HERE? It's easy = enough to=20 see why anti-hunter, anti-animal owner HSUS is pushing this bill, = but=20 what's AKC thinking, supporting such an infringement of its = customer's=20 rights and interests? AKC personnel actually negotiated this = language with=20 HSUS, through Sen. Santorum's mediator. AKC's leaders decry = increasing dog=20 imports and high volume direct retail sellers that use the = Internet, but=20 there's no credible evidence that these chosen targets sell = animals that=20 are inordinately unhealthy or less satisfactory pets than the = norm. To the=20 degree there's any minimal change in animal welfare due to this = bill, it=20 will be coincidental and unrelated to its intended impact. =

S1139=20 is about improving AKC's bottom line and competitive position. Other = registries weren't consulted. Companies frequently attempt to = use the=20 government to level a business playing field, or gain a = competitive=20 advantage. This bill is designed to hurt users of other = registries, at=20 minimal cost to the AKC. However, perhaps with the encouragement = of HSUS,=20 AKC again ignored hunting dog owners' interests. The result is a = very bad=20 bill with lots of ancillary damage. S1139 amounts to the AKC = throwing the=20 baby out with the bath water.

Action Plan

Either = intentionally=20 or through carelessness, the AKC has put dog owners using all = registries=20 at significant risk. America's dog owners must insist that the AKC = publicly withdraw its support of S.1139 immediately. Thus far its=20 management has stonewalled.=20 Since the AKC has put its own business interest before that of its = customers and betrayed their trust, the strongest possible message = must be=20 sent. That message is BOYCOTT AKC!.

This clickable = BOYCOTT=20 AKC email is preaddressed to AKC CEO Dennis Sprung with copies = to the=20 AKC's Board of Directors and the bill sponsors. Tell that group = that=20 unless the AKC publicly announces it no longer supports S.1139 at = its June=20 13, 2005 Delegate's Meeting, you are prepared to move your = registration=20 business and dog event participation to registries such as the Field = Dog Stud=20 Book, the United Kennel Club = and the=20 American Canine = Association.

As=20 additional information on S1139's status in Congress becomes = available and=20 specific action is advised, this page will be updated and SAOVA = regional=20 elist alerts will be emailed to you. Please do your part. Everyone = needs=20 to weigh in and prevent this looming train wreck from becoming = anything=20 more serious than a colossal AKC embarrassment.

Forwarding, cross posting and citations=20 = encouraged.

<= /TD>