Black Wednesday For
Dog Owners
Animal Rights Wins In Dallas, California,
Pennsylvania
by JOHN YATES
American Sporting Dog Alliance
http://www.americansportingdogalliance.org
asda@csonline.net
Wednesday was a black day for dog
owners all across America, as
animal rights extremists posted legislative
victories in Dallas,
California and Pennsylvania.
Dog owner advocacy groups fought hard in all three
contests and had
clear majority support, but animal rights groups
such as People for
the Ethical Treatment of Animals and the Humane
Society of the United
States cashed in political chips with elected
officials.
PETA and HSUS have been infiltrating local and state
advisory boards
for many years, backed by a war chest exceeding $150
million,
hundreds of paid employees and thousands of
volunteers.
Apathy remains th greatest problem faced by dog
ownership advocacy
groups.
Wednesday's votes also highlighted what is rapidly
becoming a
partisan division on animal rights legislation. In
general, almost
all Republicans voted against the legislation, and
almost all
Democrats voted for the bills. The Democratic Party
appears to be
lining up behind the animal rights agenda in support
of its
presumptive presidential candidate, Barrack Obama.
Obama has
expressed strong support for animal rights.
Here is a summary of the four issues decided this
week:
In Dallas, City Council voted 10-3 to pass an animal
control
ordinance requiring mandatory pet sterilization,
expensive permits to
own intact dogs and cats, mandatory microchipping
and pet ownership
limits. The ordinance also bans tethering of dogs
and imposes strict
requirements for keeping dogs outdoors. Home
inspections also are
authorized.
In California, the Senate Local Government Committee
voted 3-2 to
approve AB1634, which now will be sent to the Senate
Appropriations
Committee. If this committee approves, it will be
sent to the
legislature for a vote. This bill allows any person
to act as a
vigilante and report any dog owner for an
unsubstantiated violation
of any animal law. If any animal control officer
agrees, the accused
person will have a choice between paying a fine or
sterilizing the
animal. People who are accused of anything have no
right to defend
themselves or to appeal. An accusation is automatic
guilt.
In Pennsylvania, the House Rules Committee voted
Tuesday to approve
HB2532, which is a de facto ban on tail docking,
dewclaw removal and
ear cropping. In the absence of proof that the
procedure was
performed by a veterinarian, the mere possession of
a dog that has
had one of those three procedures subjects an owner
to a criminal
citation for animal cruelty. This bill would destroy
many rescue
operations, dog shows, competitive events and field
trials in
Pennsylvania and result in the deaths of thousands
of dogs. This bill
now goes to the full House for a vote, and then to
the Senate.
Also in Pennsylvania, the House Agriculture
Committee approved
amendments to the state dog and kennel law that fall
short of changes
that were promised to dog owner advocacy groups. The
actual text of
this legislation was not available at this writing,
and a follow-up
report will be issued when the revised legislation
is available. This
bill now goes to the full House for a vote, and then
to the Senate.
Please see below for more detailed descriptions of
all four issues.
Dog ownership advocates clearly outnumbered animal
rights
sympathizers in public hearings on all four pieces
of legislation, as
well as in written comments, emails and phone calls
received by
elected officials. However, many of those officials
chose to ignore
our voices, and that is doubly true of the
Democrats. We are not
saying this to be partisan, as many of our officers
and members are
loyal Democrats. We simply are stating a fact.
Democrats voted
against animal owners this week by a shocking
margin, and we urge dog
owners who are registered with this party to work to
reverse this
policy.
Advocates of dog owners' rights also were hurt by
the apathy of many
people who support us, but who did little or nothing
to voice that
support to elected officials. At the Senate hearing
in California,
for example, only about 10 people showed up. In
Dallas, about 200 dog
ownership advocates attended the hearing, but that
is a tiny
percentage of the estimated 300,000 pet owners in
the city.
Attendance at the two Pennsylvania hearings was
described as moderate.
Apathy by the large but silent majority of dog
owners is a major
component of the animal rights strategy. While we
outnumber them 100-
to-one, most of us don't get involved. In contrast,
animal rights
groups rely on an almost religious fanaticism by
their supporters to
gain a high percentage of participation.
The American Sporting Dog Alliance urges every dog
owner in America
to join one or more of the several fine
organizations that are
fighting for your rights. Each of these
organizations has its own
niche, but all are excellent and deserve your
support.
We welcome your membership and hope you will
participate fully in our
programs. Please visit us online at
http://www.americansportingsdogalliance.org.
Please stand up and be counted now!
We also ask all dog owners who belong to field trial
clubs,
sportsmen's organizations, show specialty clubs,
breed clubs and
event clubs to urge those organizations to take an
active political
role to defeat animal rights legislation.
The American Sporting Dog Alliance also is urging
dog owners to
boycott all dog events in the City of Dallas for
their own safety.
Under the terms of the ordinance, even a visitor to
the city is
subject to citations, fines and dog confiscations.
It is known that
PETA plans a protest at a July dog show in Dallas,
and we expect them
to report show dog owners for alleged violations of
the ordinance.
Because the Dallas animal commission is dominated by
PETA members, we
expect that there will be a move to raid this dog
show. All
professional handlers would be in violation of the
possession limit
of six dogs, and none of the dogs are expected to
have a required
Dallas breeding or intact permit.
If the Pennsylvania and California legislation
becomes law, it will
not be safe for anyone to attend a field trial, dog
show or
performance event in those states, or even to visit,
pass through or
take a hunting trip there.
We urge all clubs to cancel or move planned events
in Dallas now, and
also in Pennsylvania and California if their
legislation is signed
into law. We believe that clubs have an ethical
obligation to protect
the safety of participants and their dogs.
Continued apathy and non-involvement will doom dog
ownership in
America, as well as hunting, field trials and other
dog events. We
can't do it without you.
Here are the highlights of the four pieces of
legislation that were
voted on this week.
California
We support the first part of AB1634, which calls for
fines for dogs
that are allowed to roam and mandates sterilization
after the third
offense.
However, the second part of the legislation violates
basic
constitutional rights and human decency.
Here are the provisions of the second part of the
legislation
(Italics are direct quotes, and words that are not
italicized are our
comments):
· "The owner of a nonspayed or unneutered dog that
is the
subject of a complaint may be cited and pay a civil
penalty as
provided in this section. This civil penalty shall
be in addition to
any fine, fee, or penalty imposed under any other
provision of law or
local ordinance." In the first sentence, the
committee
substituted "may" for "shall," which appears to
leave the issuance of
a citation up to the discretion of an animal control
officer.
However, the basis for this decision is not defined.
· "The owner of the dog shall pay the civil penalty
to the
local animal control agency within 30 business days
of the citation.
The local animal control agency shall waive the
civil penalty if,
within 14 business days of the citation, the owner
of the dog
presents written proof from a licensed veterinarian
that the dog was
spayed or neutered." There is no provision for a dog
owner to defend
him/herself in court or at a hearing, and no appeal
is allowed. If
you are accused, you are guilty. Period. This is a
violation of
constitutional guarantees of due process and equal
protection under
the law.
· " 'Complaint' means an oral or written complaint
to a local
animal control agency that alleges that the dog or
the owner of the
dog has violated this division, any other provision
of state law that
relates to dogs, or a local animal control
ordinance. `Complaint'
also means the observation by an employee or officer
of a local
animal control agency of behavior by a dog or the
owner of a dog that
violates this division, any other provision of state
law that relates
to dogs, or a local animal control ordinance." An
example of what
this means is that a hunting or field trial dog that
is in excellent
health and conditioned for performance could result
in a complaint of
animal cruelty if anyone believes the dog looks
thin.
· " `Local animal control agency' means any city or
county
animal control agency or other entity responsible
for enforcing
animal-related laws or local animal control
ordinances." This
includes Humane Societies and other animal welfare
organizations
empowered to enforce animal cruelty or other dog
laws. Many members
of these groups support a radical animal rights
agenda.
The Senate Local Government Committee approved this
legislation by a
party-line 3-2 vote Wednesday, with Democrats in the
majority. It now
goes to the Senate Committee on Appropriations, and
then to the
Senate floor for a final vote.
Please contact members of the Appropriations
Committee immediately to
voice opposition to the second half of this bill,
and also individual
senators.
This link gives contact information for committee
members:
http://www.senate.ca.gov/ftp/sen/committee/STANDING/APPROP/_home1/PROF
ILE.HTM. The committee meets on
Monday.
This link gives contact information for all
senators:
http://www.senate.ca.gov/~newsen/senators/senators.htp.
While Sen.
Michael Machado voted for this bill on Wednesday, he
expressed many
concerns and might be convinced to change his vote.
Dallas
Here is a summary of the dog ordinance passed
Wednesday by the Dallas
City Council by a 10-3 vote. The ordinance:
· Creates a permit for a dog or cat used for
breeding or
competition. The cost of the permit is $70 annually
for each animal,
plus the regular license fee of $30. There is no
grace period or
exclusion provided for new residents or people who
are visiting
Dallas, including participants in dog shows or other
events. Visitors
can be cited, and we expect that they will be cited.
· Requires all other dogs or cats to be spayed or
neutered.
· Limits a single household to a total of six cats
and/or
dogs. People owning more than a half-acre of land
would be allowed
eight. People who currently own a greater number of
animals could
apply to the city to be allowed to keep their
animals without
penalty, but they would not be allowed to buy a dog
or breed a litter
of puppies until their number of dogs drops below
the limit. The
ordinance applies to anyone who "harbors" more than
six dogs, which
includes many visitors and participants in dog shows
and other
events. Almost all professional handlers would be in
this category,
as well as many owner/handlers.
· Subjects anyone who harbors a group of dogs that
exceeds the
limits to unannounced inspections. This would
include participants in
dog shows or other events.
· Mandates microchipping of all dogs and cats,
including those
of visitors.
· Prohibits tethering of unsupervised dogs to trees
or poles
except "for a period no longer than necessary for
the owner to
complete a temporary task."
Forces owners to provide at least 150 square feet of
space and a
building or designed doghouse for a dog confined
outdoors.
And provides for confiscation of allegedly dangerous
dogs, and other
penalties.
Please contact us at
asda@csonlinenet
if you would like to
participate in legal action or boycotts related to
the Dallas
ordinance.
Pennsylvania
Dog owners in Pennsylvania were beset by two pieces
of bad
legislation this week.
HB 2525 regulates a million dog owners and owners of
2,700 licensed
kennels in the state. It passed the House
Agriculture Committee by a
17-12 vote Wednesday. All but one Republican (Rep.
K. Boback) voted
against the bill, and all Democrats (the majority
party) voted in
favor of it.
It appears that the final bill reflects some of the
promises made to
dog ownership advocacy groups during the past
several months of
negotiations, but that the Democrats have reneged on
other promises.
Some dog owners groups have withdrawn their
opposition to this
legislation, but the American Sporting Dog Alliance
continues to
oppose it in its present form. While we support
changes that affect
commercial breeders, these represent only a small
part of HB 2525.
The rest of the bill has serious impacts on all dog
and kennel
owners. The text of several amendments has not been
published thus
far We will issue a full report on this legislation
in the next
couple of days.
The other legislation is HB 2532, which provides
what amounts to be a
de facto partial or complete ban on tail docking,
ear cropping and
dewclaw removal by anyone except a licensed
veterinarian. Although
most other dog owners' organizations have not taken
a clear public
stance on this bill, the American Sporting Dog
Alliance categorically
opposes it.
HB 2532 passed the House Judiciary Committee by a
28-1 vote Tuesday,
with only Republican Rep. T. Creighton voting "no."
The bill allows owners to dock the tails of puppies
until they pass
three days of age, and to remove dewclaws during the
first five days.
However, the burden of proof is placed on a dog's
owner to prove that
this work was done legally before the age limits, or
by a
veterinarian. It would be difficult for most dog
owners to prove
this, and a large majority would not be able to
prove it. The simple
possession of a dog with a docked tail or a lack of
dewclaws would be
considered evidence of an animal cruelty violation,
if the owner
cannot prove his/her innocence.
The bill continues a total ban against ear cropping,
except by a
veterinarian, and anyone who is found in possession
of a dog with
cropped ears is automatically guilty of criminal
animal cruelty in
the absence of proof.
For all of these procedures, HB 2532 struck out a
provision that
would have exempted dogs if their owners filed an
affidavit with a
county treasurer that the work was done before the
bill is passed.
That means a large majority of owners of many of the
most popular
breeds will have no way of proving that they have
complied with the
law. These procedures were done legally in the past
on many dogs, or
legally by breeders in other states. In many cases,
a dog owner has
no idea who performed these procedures. Thus, they
would be guilty of
criminal animal cruelty for noncompliance.
This legislation will destroy rescue work for many
breeds if it is
signed into law. Most dogs that are assisted by
rescue groups, animal
shelters and private individuals either come from
unknown sources, or
do not come with medical records. There will be no
choice except to
euthanize these dogs, since it will be impossible to
establish their
legality.
This legislation also will have a severe impact on
people who live in
other states. On one level, Pennsylvanians will no
longer be able to
buy puppies from dozens of breeds from nonresident
breeders who
perform these procedures legally in their home
states.
On another level, Pennsylvania professional trainers
and handlers
will not be able to accept many dogs from
out-of-state customers,
because proof will not be available.
But a larger impact will be on thousands of people
who own dogs and
come to Pennsylvania for a vacation, to hunt, or to
compete in field
trials, dog shows and other events. Anyone who
brings a dog with a
docked tail, missing dewclaws or cropped ears into
Pennsylvania is
subject to arrest for criminal animal cruelty
charges.
This will affect many very popular breeds of dogs,
such as almost all
Continental breeds of pointing dogs, flushing dogs,
terriers and many
working dogs, such as rottweilers and doberman
pinchers.
The bill now moves to the full House for a vote.
Please contact your
own legislator and as many others as possible to
express opposition
to this legislation. Contact information can be
found at:
http://www.legis.state.pa.us/cfdocs/legis/home/member_information/repr
esentatives_alpha.cfm.
Here is a link to the text of the legislation:
http://www.legis.state.pa.us/CFDOCS/Legis/PN/Public/btCheck.cfm?
txtType=HTM&sessYr=2007&sessInd=0&billBody=H&billTyp=B&billNbr=2532&pn
=4030
The American Sporting Dog Alliance represents
owners, hobby breeders
and professionals who work with breeds of dogs that
are used for
hunting. 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. Please visit us on the web at
http://www.americansportingdogalliance.org.
Our email is
ASDA@csonline.net.
Complete directions to join by mail or online are
found at the bottom left of each page.
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 the
donations of our
members, and maintain strict independence.
PLEASE CROSS-POST AND FORWARD THIS REPORT TO YOUR
FRIENDS
|
|