Wayne's World: HSUS Liars, Cheaters, and Thieves

The assault against dog breeders continues as Wayne Pacelle releases his continuation of propaganda and lies in his most recent blog entitled, “Puppy Mills & 101 Damnations.” 

Once again, Pacelle turns to the disturbing tactic of singling out dog breeders and publishing their names, their addresses, and breeding establishments all obtained from the now anti-animal agriculture agency of USDA who willingly relinquished the private information and inspection photos via Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request. The photos given to HSUS for their report are taken out of context in order to support exaggerated claims of abuse to coerce breeders to close up their breeding operations. 

Pacelle and HSUS lead the way in betraying well-intended Americans into believing that their focus is on the unscrupulous dog breeders, when the opposite is true.  HSUS and their ideology opposes animal breeding of any kind and especially those who do so for profit.  

So, when Pacelle says that they take their job of eliminating “puppy mills” seriously what he really means is that they want to eliminate ALL dog breeders including the ones who follow the law. 

Pacelle’s true agenda is illustrated in an HSUS tweet on Twitter from March of 2013 where HSUS gives the HSUS definition of a "puppy mill:" 

Furthermore, HSUS has stated on numerous occasions that they do not believe that pure bred dogs should exist, rather they promote legislation and regulatory reform that would make pure bred dogs prohibitively expensive, incentivizing consumers to “adopt.”  The HSUS definition of adoption really means that the consumer will purchase their new pet for $350-$500 from a shelter instead of a licensed breeder.   So these retail shelters are now the competition for pure bred dog breeders, and HSUS, as well as government at the local, state and federal levels, are doing everything in their power to over-regulate and eliminate the dog breeders.

The most insidious way in which this strategy has taken form can be found in the subversive way that organizations such as HSUS pressure, infiltrate, and influence government bureaucracies like the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA).  By lobbying for the implementation of obscure rules such as the recently implemented “Retail Pet Rule” – these new regulations and rules pose disastrous problems for breeders across the country without consumers ever becoming aware of the situation.   

Make no mistake, HSUS is a multi-million dollar animal rights extremist organization which raises money to promote increased regulation on animal ownership and enterprise.  They promote government regulations that handcuff breeders, while rescues and shelters are exempt from abiding by the same rules.  That's not increasing animal welfare standards, it is purely crony capitalism favoring one group, while punishing another. 

The Cavalry Group favors a free market that allows consumers to chose among a wide spectrum of options, where ALL pet providers have to play by the same rules.  Unfortunately, Wayne Pacelle and everyone else at HSUS will lie, cheat, and steal to get their way as evidenced by another slanderous piece of propaganda intended to raise money to perpetuate the HSUS agenda.

Mindy Patterson is the president of The Cavalry Group, a member based company protecting and defending the Constitutional and private property rights of law abiding animal owners, animal-related business, hunters, and agriculture concerns legally nationwide.

Over-Regulation and HSUS Carlotta Cooper

In these days of government over-regulation it still might surprise you to learn that a government agency could determine the next puppy you get. But if the Obama Administration and Tom Vilsack at USDA have their way, that's exactly what will happen.

The USDA's APHIS (Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service) agency announced a proposed rule in May that would devastate small-scale purebred dog breeders who raise dogs in their homes. This includes most breeders of show dogs, people who breed K9 search and rescue dogs, police dogs, and protection dogs, many hunting dog breeders, and people who breed dogs for the disabled, as well as people who produce good pet dogs.

The rule proposed by APHIS would result in a serious change in direction to the Animal Welfare Act (AWA) which they administer. The Animal Welfare Act was originally passed in the 1960s to protect laboratory animals and it was later altered to allow USDA to oversee the care of breeding animals in large commercial facilities. For the past 15 years the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) and other animal rights groups have been seeking to change the Animal Welfare Act so that it covers more than animals raised by wholesalers as it does currently. They have been trying to stretch the act to cover retailers, which would include breeders who raise a litter at home and sell directly to a buyer.

The Doris Day Animal League, which has since been subsumed by HSUS, sued USDA (DDAL vs Ann Veneman (Secretary of Agriculture) in 1997 in order to try to force USDA to apply wholesale breeding regulations to retailers, i.e., to treat home breeders the same way USDA treated large commercial breeders. DDAL initially won in court but the case was reversed on appeal by the Washington DC U.S. District Court of Appeals.  http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-dc-circuit/1362167.html One of the things that's so interesting about this case is that USDA opposed the animal rights position at this time. They claimed that the Animal Welfare Act should not be applied to retail breeders, who are typically small-scale breeders. According to USDA at this time, it would be a waste of the agency's inspectors and other resources to try to oversee these entities.

But things change and with the Obama victory in 2008, regulations were seen as the way to accomplish many things that could not be accomplished legislatively. Today USDA is supporting the animal rights position and trying to force small-scale breeders, as retailers, to live under commercial breeding or wholesaler regulations.

HSUS, which is NOT the same as your local humane society or animal shelter, has been trying each year to pass repressive legislation against pet breeders. So far they have failed, despite the fact that they have lured many first term congressmen to support the PUPS bill (Puppy Uniform Protection and Safety, Senate Bill 707 (S.707) and House Bill 835 (H.R. 835)  which would apply onerous restrictions to small-scale dog and cat breeders. Even some Republicans who should know better are supporting this bill which would do many of the same things that the proposed APHIS rule would do. It would label many small-scale breeders as commercial breeders and they would be forced to become USDA-licensed and inspected.

Just to make sure you get the picture, we are talking about your Aunt Susie who has a few Yorkies and raises some puppies. She would have to get a USDA license and have inspectors come to her home. But, it's not that simple. In order to become USDA-licensed, she would have to make her facilities (her home) USDA-compliant. That means having non-permeable surfaces that can be cleaned at temps of 180 degrees, proper ventilation in the areas where the dogs are kept, drainage for that cleaning water, insurance as a commercial business, possible approval by her homeowner's association, zoning approval, and a host of other requirements under AWA rules. She would go from being a hobbyist to a small business, whether she liked it or not. It's kind of hard to do these things if you're a small breeder living in the suburbs. And that's where many of our best home-raised puppies come from. When you want a good, home-raised puppy, you go to someone like Aunt Susie. But Tom Vilsack and the USDA would like to have small breeders put their dogs in kennels so they can make everyone be USDA/AWA compliant. Or, perhaps it's safer to say that USDA would like all of us small breeders to just disappear.

Are you wondering why the Humane Society of the United States would support the PUPS bill or the proposed APHIS rule when they would send our home-raised dogs out to the kennels? Aren't they the folks who are supposed to care so much for animals? Despite the ubiquitous ads with sad-faced kittens and puppies, HSUS does not support local shelters. The money they raise goes for lobbying on animal rights issues; lawsuits against agricultural interests; and their own salaries and pensions. Less than 1 percent of the money they raise goes to the animals. It would suit HSUS just fine to get rid of small hobby breeders who have been resisting them. The Humane Society of the United States opposes all animal breeding. It is easier for them to control breeders if they have breeders thoroughly regulated under the APHIS proposed rule and/or PUPS. They have won over USDA to a great extent now, at least under Tom Vilsack. HSUS, through it's lobbying arm the Humane Society Legislative Fund, is a contributor to the campaign of Vilsack's wife, Christie Vilsack, running for Congress in Iowa. And HSLF has contributed more than $100,000 to oppose Christie Vilsack's opponent, none other than Rep. Steve King, who has been a vocal opponent of HSUS-sponsored bills in Congress. http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2941250/posts Earlier this fall, eight Iowa TV stations refused to air Humane Society Legislative Fund ads against King because of their sensationalism and dishonesty. The ads had to be re-worked before stations would accept them. When's the last time you heard of TV stations refusing ads? Well, PETA comes to mind.

The upshot is, the Humane Society of the United States is no friend to animals, whether they are pets or in agriculture. Over-regulation and animal rights-supported bills are hurting all of us, even the people who raise pets. Don't be fooled when you hear that something is “good for the animals.” If it comes from HSUS or if it smacks of over-regulation, just say no.

Carlotta Cooper writes for The Cavalry Group. She's a contributing editor for the weekly dog show magazine Dog News. She's been breeding and showing English Setters for 25 years.

PUPS - - MISPLACED CONGRESSIONAL PRIORITIES - - THE “ART OF FINESSE!”

QUESTION:  WHEN WILL NURSING HOMES BE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE THE SAME LEVEL OF CARE FOR LOVED ONES AS IS PROVIDED TO DOGS?

As of August 15, 2011, 128 Members of Congress (24%) have either sponsored or co-sponsored PUPS - - a Legislative Bill that would amend the Animal Welfare Act and establish even more stringent care standards for all Federally Licensed and Inspected Dog Breeders than currently exist.  Here it is significant to note that if PUPS were enacted, it would set the stage for the HSUS to “push” and “pressure” the USDA to extend coverage of the Animal Welfare Act to hobby breeders as well.

The existing standards for dogs, as set out in the implementing Animal Welfare Regulation, are very detailed as to the precise quality of care that must be provided for each and every dog and puppy, as well as exacting requirements that, among other things, include precise “comfort” limitations on the temperatures maintained for the sheltered housing of dogs.  In this regard, Section 3.3 of the Animal Welfare Regulation provides that “sheltered housing facilities for dogs . . . must be sufficiently cooled when necessary to protect dogs . . . from temperature or humidity extremes and to provide for their health and well being.”  This same provision further provides that the “ambient temperature must not . . . rise above 85 (degrees F) for more than 4 hours when . . . dogs are present.  The preceding requirements are in addition to, not in place of, all other requirements pertaining to climatic conditions in parts 2 and 3 of this Chapter.”   Furthermore, to ensure strict compliance with all provisions of the Animal Welfare Act, and its implementing Regulation, the Department of Agriculture is required to ensure that all Federally Licensed Breeders are in full compliance with the Animal Welfare Act and its implementing Regulation through the use of a detailed Federal Inspection Program which includes periodic, no notice inspections by Federal Inspectors of every Federally Licensed Dog Kennel in the entire U.S.

In contrast, while the U.S. Congress did enact the Nursing Home Reform Act in 1987, neither that Act nor its implementing Regulation that exists today - - nearly 25 years after Congress enacted the Nursing Home Reform Act - - establish Standards of Care for our Loved Ones, who must spend the twilight of their lives in Nursing Homes, with the same degree of detail as currently exists in the implementing Regulation to the Animal Welfare Act that explicitly establishes the required and detail care for dogs.  For example, if the air conditioning breaks down on a Friday Night in a Nursing Home and the ambient room temperature in the rooms of Loved Ones with respiratory problems rises above 85 (degrees F) for more than 4 hours, unlike the mandatory requirements for the care of dogs, there is no requirement for our Loved Ones to be moved to another room where the temperature is below 86 degrees F, or for the air conditioning to be repaired before Monday morning, if ever!  Furthermore, there is no current Statutory requirement, nor is there any pending legislation being considered by the U.S.  Congress that would require the Department of Health and Human Services to use Federal Inspectors to periodically inspect Nursing Homes - - that receive Billions of Dollars in Medicare and Medicaid Payments - - to ensure that our Loved Ones in Nursing Homes are actually receiving the minimum level of care mandated by the Nursing Home Reform Act.   To many, the absence of an air conditioning standard for Nursing Homes that is comparable to the air conditioning standard for dog kennels, and the absence of a Federal Inspection Program for Nursing Homes suggest that Congress places a higher priority on the care and welfare of dogs than it does for the care and welfare of our Loved Ones in Nursing Homes.

If you believe that a Loved One in a Nursing Home should receive at least the same quality of care as is provided to a dog, why don’t you ask your Members of Congress to support such legislation as a backdoor way to “finesse” and highlight the absurdity of the PUPS Bill without creating the appearance of a parochial interest of dog breeders.  That is the essence of the “Art of Finesse!”  In this regard, if the Members of Congress, who have co-sponsored the PUPS Bill, were to be made aware of the fact that they have placed  a higher priority on the care and welfare for dogs than on the care and welfare for our Loved Ones in Nursing Homes, a few may wince and reconsider their decision to co-sponsor PUPS.  And to those who are currently being “lobbied” by the HSUS to co-sponsor the PUPS Bill, the revelation about a higher priority for the care of dogs than for our Loved Ones in Nursing Homes may stop the momentum for any more Members of Congress to co-sponsor PUPS. 

I truly believe that if the Members of Congress became fully aware of the fact that the Federal Government places a higher priority on the care and welfare of dogs than on the care and welfare of our Loved Ones in Nursing Homes, such an awakening revelation may be the “showstopper” to derail the on-going momentum to enact the PUPS Bill.

Stop and reflect for a moment………. How many Members of Congress do you believe would welcome notoriety associated with the fact that the U.S. Congress apparently has placed a higher priority on the care and welfare of a dog than on the care and welfare of a Loved One in a Nursing Home?

If you wish to bring this comparative absurdity of Congressional Priorities to the attention your respective Members of Congress, you may do so by sending an E-Mail to them.  To send E-Mails, simply follow the instructions below.  It will take you less than 10 Minutes to do so, and it just may derail and stop the HSUS PUPS Freight Train!!!

1.  To send an E-Mail to your U.S. Representative, Log onto www.house.gov/writerep/

2.  Fill in your state and ZIP Code on the prompt that appears.

3.  Add your name, address and E-Mail address on the E-Mail Form for your U.S. Representative; and on the Subject Line add: PUPS - - MISPLACED CONGRESSIONAL PRIORITIES;  and then add the message set out below.

4.  To send an E-Mail to your Two Senators, Log onto:    www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm

5.  Click onto the E-Mail Address for each of your two U.S. Senators.

6.  Add your name, address and E-Mail address on the E-Mail Form for your two U.S. Senators; and on the Subject Line add: PUPS - - MISPLACED CONGRESSIONAL PRIORITIES;  and then add the message set out below.

Suggested Text of E-Mail Message

“I was alarmed to learn that the Federal Government has an Inspection Program that requires that all Federally Licensed  Breeders receive no notice inspections by Federal Inspectors to ensure compliance with the Animal Welfare Act, but that there is no Federal Inspection Program for Nursing Homes where our Loved Ones must  spend the twilight of their lives in a Nursing Home.  I am equally concerned that the Federal Government has an air conditioning standard for dog kennels, but no such air conditioning standard exists for the Nursing Home Rooms where our Loved Ones reside. 

Since the Federal Standards for the care and welfare of dogs in kennels are already more stringent than the existing Federal Standards for the care and welfare for our Loved Ones in Nursing Homes; and since Nursing Homes are not subject to periodic inspections by Federal Inspectors in the same manner that dog kennels are subject to inspections by Federal Inspectors, would you please tell me why Congress places a higher priority on amending the Animal Welfare Act with the pending PUPS Bill than it does on ensuring that Nursing Home Reform Act is amended so that our Loved Ones in Nursing Homes will receive the same level of care that is currently required by the U.S. Government to be provided for dogs?”