The Cavalry Group's Statement Regarding USDA's Policy Change to Remove Licensee Information from Its Website

In recent months, The Cavalry Group has been responding on behalf of our members, to letters from USDA/APHIS indicating that the Humane Society of the U.S. (HSUS), People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), and other animal rights extremist organizations had requested private, confidential information about their business via Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests submitted to USDA. 

In response to the onslaught of FOIA requests affecting our members, I wrote an article challenging USDA's policy of releasing private, confidential information to these radical animal rights groups, highlighting that USDA knows full well that this unjudicated information would be taken out of context and used to hurt the businesses of the affected licensees.  

Read article here  

Listen to Mindy Patterson's interview with Trent Loos about this issue here

Statement:

The Cavalry Group and our Members all over the United States applaud the change in USDA policy that was implemented on Friday, February 3, 2017 regarding private, confidential and un-adjudicated USDA licensee information.

For the last eight years, USDA has been releasing confidential and un-adjudicated information to animal rights extremists and activist organizations, such as the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) and People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) knowing that the information would be used wrongfully against USDA licensees with the intent to run them out of business.

Empirical data exists evidencing that animal rights groups have used licensees’ information to make fraudulent claims and anonymous tips to authorities, and terrorize law abiding American families whose livelihood happens to involve exhibiting, breeding, transporting, or selling animals.

Evidence also exists that during the past eight years, USDA has been infiltrated by animal rights extremists who, with some success, attempted to change the culture within USDA-APHIS from one that is supportive of animal enterprise to one that aggressively bullies and harasses law abiding animal businesses with the ultimate goal of running them out of business.

Mindy Patterson

President

The Cavalry Group

Federal 8th Circuit Court of Appeals Rules for Ag Groups' EPA Data Breach Suit Regarding Disclosure of Personal Information

       On September 9, 2016, in the case of American Farm Bureau Federation et al. v. Environmental Protection Agency et al., Case No. 13-cv-1751, in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, the federal appellate court revived a bid by two farm groups to stop the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency from releasing addresses and other information about large-scale animal farms under the Freedom of Information Act, finding that exclusive of the mandates of the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), the provision of such data to environmental groups is actually a privacy violation.

       The American Farm Group Federation and the National Pork Producers Council sued the EPA in July 2013 after the agency released the names, addresses and GPS locations of farms that keep animals in close confinement in several states. Environmental groups, including Food & Water Watch, had requested the information, and the plaintiffs sought to prevent further disclosures.

       U.S. District Judge Ann D. Montgomery found that Clean Water Act regulations for pollution discharges require farmers to disclose their location to state agencies and that the information must be made public under federal regulations. The plaintiffs argued that the EPA's release information would be an invasion of their privacy and should have qualified for an FOIA exemption.  But the judge held they lacked standing because they failed to show an imminent injury. The information was already available on Minnesota and Iowa environmental agencies' websites and easily found by searching their databases, according to the lower court opinion.

       The American Farm Bureau Federation and the National Pork Producers Council asked the court to reverse a lower court's ruling that killed their challenge to the EPA's disclosure of their members' personal information as it related to concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFO's), saying the agency had misapplied an exemption under FOIA that's meant to protect personal privacy.  The farmers argued to the appeals panel that the Supreme Court has held that "the law recognizes a right not only to prevent the public disclosure of facts that remain wholly private, but also to control of 'the degree of dissemination' of facts that, although in the public record, nevertheless concern private matters."

       The court of appeals panel sided with the farmers, concluding "the undisputed evidence of nonconsensual disclosures or impending disclosures by the EPA suffice to establish an injury in fact that was caused by the agency and is redressable by the court," adding that "disclosure would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy ... and it was an abuse of discretion for the agency to conclude otherwise."  "The EPA's disclosure of spreadsheets containing personal information about owners of CAFO's would invade a substantial privacy interest of the owners while furthering little in the way of public interest that is cognizable under FOIA" the panel said.

       The 8th Circuit Court held that just because information about a particular farm owner can be obtained through publicly available sources does not mean privacy interests go out the window, highlighting an important distinction between merely accessing information and the likelihood of the public to actually focus on that information.

       "The agency's release of the complete set of data on a silver platter, so to speak, eliminates the need for requesters and others to scour different websites and to pursue public records requests to create a comprehensive database of their own," the court said. "If the information were so easily accessible, then it is passing strange that the parties would engage in protracted and expensive litigation to secure it through the Freedom of Information Act."

       This case provides The Cavalry Group, its members and other animal owners/enterprises with a solid argument to contest USDA's and other agencies' disclosure of private and personal information being solicited by animal rights and other activists/organizations.

Kurtis B. Reeg, Esq.
Partner, Goldberg Segalla
Legal Counsel for The Cavalry Group

Information for this article also came from Portfolio Media, Inc. and Law360

To view the case file, click here

USDA RELEASES PRIVATE INFORMATION OF DOG BREEDERS TO ASPCA

The contemporary “animal rights” movement and its various factions are not what they seem. For every legitimate concern, there are dozens of front groups operated and funded by extremists with radical agendas. For instance, over the past several years, the ASPCA, PETA, and HSUS have been waging a war against so-called “puppy mills.”  

They lead Americans to believe that their focus is on rogue, unscrupulous dog breeders, but in a recent interview, the ASPCA admitted that they consider even law-abiding dog breeders to be “puppy mills.” Animal rights activists hold the belief that bringing new, pure-bred dogs into existence is unethical so long as there are dogs in shelters.  Thus, they seek to put every law-abiding dog breeder permanently out of business by any means necessary.  

Their public relations war against dog breeding has raked in countless millions from unsuspecting donors who are unaware of the fact that almost none of this money actually goes to the care of dogs. The numbers of abused animals are inflated and exaggerated to the point where you would think that puppy mills were an epidemic. In reality, almost all dog breeders are hard-working, rural Americans, who take very good care of their animals.  

Recently, the activists have turned to a disturbing, new tactic of singling out individual breeders and publishing their names, their addresses, and photographs of their breeding establishments. Where do they obtain such information, one might ask? The answer: None other than our own government, courtesy of the United States Department of Agriculture.  

The USDA, once tasked with protecting American farmers and breeders, has crawled into bed with the most anti-farming elements of the Left. Despite the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) explicitly granting a protection through Exemption 6 for any personal information that can be linked to an individual, the USDA decided to respond the ASPCA’s FOIA request by handing over the personal information and inspection photos of dog breeders from all over the United States.

As part of the inspection process, the USDA takes these photographs of breeding facilities in order to ensure compliance. Many breeders report being told that these photos are to be used only for the purpose of inspection. Several contacted The Cavalry Group, an organization which defends the rights of animal owners, horrified to find pictures of their homes and businesses on the ASPCA website. Many of the photos were over 10 years old, and some included pictures of businesses that have changed owners. In several notable cases, the breeder in question had been deceased for many years.

The ASPCA wants people to believe that these photos depict a day-to-day reality of all dog breeding facilities. 

The photos, however, were taken out of context in order to support an exaggerated claim of widespread animal abuse and to renew calls for widespread regulation of the dog breeding industry. In reality, the breeding facility in question corrected any areas of non-compliance with the law shortly after the inspection. 

Yet today, their businesses are being perpetually smeared by an organization that seeks to bring about an end to pure-bred dogs in favor of adoption from shelters, all with the help of our own government.

The ASPCA is well within their rights to advocate for adoption, but using out of date information to smear the reputations of individual dog-breeders is going a step too far. Most importantly, the USDA should not be skirting FOIA exemptions in order to accommodate the agenda of radical activists. However, when the USDA is hijacked by these very same groups, we should not expect anything less. A once-sensible objective of animal welfare has been corrupted by today’s activists, who exploit government in order to put animals ahead of humans at any cost.

Read this article on Breitbart.com

Author, Phil Christofanelli is the Director of Public Affairs for 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.