New Subscription Database Set To Smear Dog Breeders

Just when you thought you've had your fill of fake news and relentless attacks on animal breeders... a new website masquerading as a pro-dog breeder publication is resorting to disturbing tactics to disparage dog breeders, dog breeding, and the AKC.

Last week, a new publication launched called, The Canine Review. Sounds familiar, right? Not to be mistaken by Canine Review, Canada's oldest independent competitive dog show magazine featuring Canada's top canine handlers and dog show enthusiasts, founded in 1978.

An imposter, The Canine Review, was launched recently by an Emily Brill, former writer for BuzzFeed andThe Daily Beast. Emily Brill is not a credible source for issues surrounding the hobby and profession of dog breeding. Her organization and website is nothing more than an anti-breeder, animal rights hit job on dog breeders, while resorting to the all too familiar scheme of publishing lies and misinformation. 

In preparation for the launch of her dupe publication-website, Emily Brill called several individual breeders and interviewed them under the deceptively familiar-sounding name of The Canine Review. In HSUS fashion, Emily Brill twisted the truth, taking inspection reports and breeding protocol out of context and used it to smear these breeders on her new website. 

Ms. Brill makes access to these smear reports on her website to subscribers only. So, for $19.99 a year, anyone can pay to read the lies she purports. 

So much for transparency and legitimacy in Ms. Brill's new "publication."  

Brill Tweeted about the logo design for her new website which calls into questions whether there are copyright infringements with the name being almost identical to the Canadian publication, Canine Review. 

Brill has also posted an advertisement on the Berkley Journalism website seeking freelance writers to produce "feature stories for paid subscribers who will have access to a database of profiles of breeders and animal shelters across the country." 

This post is to serve as a warning to all dog breeders to avoid speaking with Emily Brill or anyone from The Canine Review.

The Cavalry Group will release an article soon which will set the record straight about the misinformation and lies that Emily Brill has published.

To those who are members, thank you for your membership and support.

Your friend in the fight,

Mindy Patterson

President

The Cavalry Group

Animal Rights Whack-A-Mole in Kitsap County, Washington

Here’s something you may not know. The animal rights movement loses a lot. You probably think that animal rights activists are out celebrating their victories every night but the truth is that they are constantly defeated at the federal, state, and local levels.

How can that be, you ask, when they are constantly in the news? 

That’s because they are loud and obnoxious. They are the epitome of the squeaky wheel. Even when they are led off in handcuffs they are happy to video the scene and post it online so they can raise money for bail.

But animal rights activists are persistent. They play the long game.

If they lose with bills at the federal level – and they do lose with bills, year after year after year – they try to get changes made through regulatory agencies. If that doesn’t work to their satisfaction, they move down to the state government level and try to get what they want, one state at a time.

When they are thwarted by state governments, they go local. Activists can turn up in your city or town and start whispering in the ears of your local council members.

When a bill that would have banned the sale of puppies and kittens from breeders was defeated with the help of The Cavalry Group in Washington’s state capitol, animal rights activists began singling out individual pet stores in the state. That’s how Jack Munro found himself at the center of a fight in Kitsap County Washington. Jack, who used to show and breed Collies and Shelties, is the owner of Farmland Feed and Pets in Kitsap County where he’s been in business for 43 years.

In December 2018, just after Christmas, Jack says he got a call from a county council member telling him that in five days they intended to vote on a measure that would put him out of business. He was told that he could see the proposed ordinance online. He had no input in writing the ordinance. The ordinance would ban his store from selling pets unless they came from the local shelter or rescue group.

It took seven months, but the ordinance was finally passed on July 22, 2019. The Cavalry Group mounted several large e-mail campaigns on behalf of Farmland to fight the ordinance. The county council received thousands of e-mails asking them to reject the proposed ordinance. The council told Jack, “No more emails!” According to Jack, many people turned out on behalf of Farmland at each reading of the ordinance. When it came to the date of the final vote the council moved the vote several times. No public comments were allowed for the final vote.

Jack would originally have been required to stop selling his animals immediately but that has been amended. He now has a year to stop selling his puppies and kittens.

Jack says that he will never sell shelter animals in his store. He has had a decades-long positive relationship with a professional licensed and inspected dog breeder in Kansas who has supplied him with puppies for the store. Through Farmland he has sold puppies with a 5-generation pedigree that were DNA-tested. They came with pictures of the parents, a complete medical record, a health guarantee, a free visit to the vet, and they were microchipped. The kittens in his store come from local people who drop them off. He gets them for free or never pays more than $10 for the really cute ones. They don’t come from breeders. Yet critics claim that Jack is only selling puppies and kittens for the money.

Per the local humane society, some 6,000 dogs were rehomed in Kitsap County in 2018. Three-thousand of them came from out of state. Thousands of dogs are brought into Washington from out of state by “rescue” groups every year, not all of them legally. Jack sells about 400 dogs per year at Farmland and only 3 percent of them ever have a problem. That’s 12 dogs. And Farmland’s dogs have a health guarantee and a contract.

Puppies at the local humane society in Kitsap County are $350. Purebred dogs are $250-$500. Kittens are $175. Before you can get any pet at the humane society you have to fill out an application and you have to be “approved.”

Jack is well-liked and some local people in the community, even people who do not particularly like commercial dog breeders, have said that they felt bad about this ordinance and putting Farmland out of business. According to Jack, even the local council members told him that they didn’t like forcing a local business to close.

Local ordinances banning pet stores from selling puppies from breeders, like the one that is forcing Farmland to close, are being passed all over the United States. Local governments are often pressured by animal activists to pick winners and losers in business because the activists are pushy and outspoken. Sometimes proposed ordinances are hidden so the public doesn’t know about them until after they are passed; votes are moved at the last minute; people who oppose an ordinance are not notified of changes; people affected by ordinances and their supporters are not given timely access to proposed drafts. This is the worst kind of dirty politics and it’s being played in our hometowns, affecting our animals and our businesses.

These ordinances can be passed anywhere and affect any of us. Today it’s pet stores but tomorrow it could be an ordinance to ban dog breeding or whether you can own pets at all. Good people are being driven out of business because of the animal rights agenda. This is not fair or honest government. Local government should not be agenda-driven and it shouldn’t pick winners and losers in business based on animal rights ideology. We all need to stand up to these bad ordinances and bills when they appear. We need to fight together and protect our rights.

  

Carlotta Cooper is vice president of Sportsmens’ & Animal Owners’ Voting Alliance and a regular contributing writer for The Cavalry Group, a member-based company working to defend the private property rights of animal owners and animal enterprise nationwide. Follow The Cavalry Group on Facebook, MeWe, Instagram, and Twitter.

Why You Should Know Your County Sheriff

Too often, protection from illegal search and seizure, and a citizen’s right to due process of the law, all of which are outlined specifically in the U.S. Constitution under the Fourth, Fifth, and Fourteenth Amendments, are railroaded by local animal control officers or a bureaucratic system that defies common sense or even standard animal husbandry knowledge or practice. 

As a proactive measure in protecting your animals, your business, and your private property, The Cavalry Group always urges our members to get to know their local county sheriff. 

Your local sheriff is an elected position which stands as the upholder, defender, protector, and servant to the liberties of the people within your county by upholding the supreme law of the land, known as the U.S. Constitution. 

Are you aware your county sheriff's enforcement powers supersede those of any agent, officer, elected official or employee from ANY level of government when in the jurisdiction of your county?

In June 2016, The Cavalry Group held our first Liberty Summit in St. Charles, Missouri. One of our superb speakers at this event was Richard Mack, former Constitutional Sheriff of Graham County, Arizona, and founder of the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association. 

"You want to protect your ranch? You want to protect your land? Imagine, now, of all the problems that you've seen and heard, or have personally experienced -- but that your sheriff was there with his deputies to defend your God given rights." ~ Sheriff Richard Mack 

Watch the video below of Sheriff Mack's speech at Liberty Summit 2016 to learn more about the sheriff's role in your county and the importance of a Constutional sheriff and their ability to interpose between you and the violator of your rights. 

Be aware:
Not all Sheriffs may be looking out 
for your best interest as a constituent! 

Unfortunately, in recent years, the National Sheriffs Association has partnered with the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) to further their radical agenda by inserting their ideology within law enforcement by training officials nationwide. 

Click here to read the National Sheriff's Association announcement about partnering with HSUS.   

The link below is HSUS' CEO interviewing National Sheriff's Association Chief, John Thompson about their reasons for partnering and how they plan to infringe on due process rights of animal owners and animal related busineses across the United States. 

Click here to see the video about HSUS and NSA's collaboration. 

To counter HSUS' radical ideological takeover of law enforcement across our country, we urge you to support Sheriff Mack's Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association. 

Are you concerned that your Sheriff might not be favorable toward your animal enterprise?  You can Vet Your Sheriff by Clicking Here

Support the Constitutional Sheriffs and 

Peace Officers Association today! 

The CSPOA is an a-political movement as the constitutional Sheriff is not defined as Democrat, Republican or Libertarian. A constitutional Sheriff, in reference to their OATH, their citizenry, and the constitution is dedicated to UPHOLD – DEFEND – PROTECT – SERVE.

Support, Join, Donate to CSPOA  Click here

Join The Freedom Coalition and help free America's political prisoners and clean up bureaucratic corruption in America! Click here

Read Sheriff Richard Mack's book: The County Sheriff: America's Last Hope.   Click here

The sheriff is the last line of defense for his constituents; he is America’s last hope to regain our forgotten freedom. 

Sheriff Mack insists that we ALL stand for the Constitution and our Founding principles to protect freedom and liberty in America today, and for future generations, by holding our government officials accountable to their oath of office. 

Stand with us! 

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

Why Are We So Quick To Dance With The Devil?

The news out of New York City gets worse by the day.  A group Ed Sayres created and funded (NYCLASS or New Yorkers for Clean Livable and Safe Streets) to destroy a political candidate and a traditional animal business is now under federal and state investigation.

This is very serious.

I've spent the last decade of my life opposing Ed Sayres and the lies and misinformation he was handsomely paid to produce to attack all animal enterprises.  You'll have to forgive me if I'm skeptical of his alleged change of heart now that he claims to be in favor of pet shops and commercial pet breeders.

Jay Kitchener testifying in opposition
to LD 335 in Maine. Photo Credit:
Joe Phelan/Kennebec Journal

When I fought hard last year in my state of Maine against LD 335, a bill to prohibit sales of dogs and cats from out of state commercial breeders, I never once saw Ed Sayres in the room to testify and oppose LD 335.  What I do recall is the first legislative conference call we had with Ed Sayres where his first statement was, “Pet shop owners need to have a Plan B."

What was Ed's Plan B, I wondered?

Why are pet stores so quick to partner with the man who still says, "Adoption should always be everyone's first option"? See his recent testimony before Arizona House Agriculture, Water and Lands Committee where he states it here.

Although Ed Sayres has left the sleazy and controversial ASPCA in Manhattan, the propaganda he produced while he was employed there has had its intended effect.  The elephants are gone from the circus, and the orcas will soon be gone from Sea World.  Do you really think it's going to be any different with dogs in pet shops?

Perhaps the day Ed apologizes to the Feld family (owners of Ringling Brothers Circus) and tries to refund some of the more than $20 million they spent to fight him, then I'll feel a little better.  Or perhaps the day Ed apologizes to Sea World I'll feel a little better.  But it will never bring back the elephants or the orcas.

Why are pet stores so quick to partner with the man
who says, "Adoption should always be everyone's first option."

If Ed Sayres had such a change of heart after a decade of serving as a highly-paid executive with a national stage, what do you think it would take for him to have a change of heart and return to his roots?  I'm not convinced that if Wayne Pacelle of the Humane Society of the United States, or Ingrid Newkirk of PETA offered Ed Sayres a pile of cash to bat for their teams that he would turn it down. Why should he?

After spending several years putting together the controversial political hit group NYCLASS while still at the helm of the equally controversial ASPCA in New York, Sayres walked away from those organizations in 2013.  

Then in 2014 Sayres appeared as the president of the Pet Industry Joint Advisory Council (PIJAC) in Washington, DC—the very group Sayres had been handsomely paid to defeat for a decade.

Sayres served at the helm of PIJAC in 2015, then quietly became a “special advisor” to them in 2016.  

There’s a problem here.  Since 2013 more than 120 communities across the nation have passed the radical legislation to prevent pet shops from selling breeder’s animals—the very same radical legislation that Ed Sayres spent his career at ASPCA preparing to unleash on the country.  This legislation is the same all over the nation.  This cookie cutter legislation prohibits pet shops from selling animals from licensed and inspected kennels and mandates that pet shops may only sell animals from unknown sources provided by shelters and rescue groups like the ASPCA.  This legislation comes straight from the playbook of ASPCA and the other controversial animal rights groups like the Humane Society of the United States and PETA.  

I don’t believe for a minute that Ed Sayres had an epiphany in 2014 and decided to join the very group defending pet shops and commercial breeders from the same legislation Sayres spent a decade crafting.

I do believe, Ed Sayres did not join PIJAC to prevent the government-forced transition from purposefully and professionally bred pets in pet shops.  Ed Sayres joined PIJAC to facilitate the government-forced transition to only randomly sourced animals in pet shops.  Was this the “plan B” to which Sayres referred in the first conference call with pet shop owners nationwide?

To this day Sayres defends his position against the New York City horse carriage industry. To this day he defends his misguided positions against the circus and Sea World.  Are we expected to believe he has truly had a change of heart when it comes to professional commercial dog kennels?  I’m not buying it.

Now that both the United States Attorney and the Manhattan District Attorney have subpoenaed the group NYCLASS that Sayres helped create, it’s a fair question to wonder if the mushrooming investigation will extend to Sayres at some point.  If it does, then the Pet Industry Joint Advisory Council will have egg on its face, and Ed Sayres might want to have his own “Plan B.”

"When he asks you to dance you had better say never because a dance with the devil could last you forever."

Written by Jay Kitchener who is a leading advocate in the purebred dog industry. Jay has been on the forefront in preserving the rights of dog breeders and animal owners, and recently helped in turning back an effort to ban retail pet sales in Maine. Jay is now serving as the New England Regional Director for The Cavalry Group.

Watch Ed Sayres' testimony below where he says, 
"Adoption should always be the first option." 

The Destruction of Private Ownership of "Wild" Animals

The Cavalry Group and its members are all too familiar with the lies and facades that the animal rights groups use, working through government agencies to implement their agenda to eliminate the human animal bond, animal ownership, and private property.

In Texas, Carter Smith, the Executive Director of the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department (TPWD), ordered the destruction of perfectly healthy whitetail deer of private owners on deer farms across the state of Texas, wielding his power, and creating a fake crisis to usurp the rights of the property owner.

Under Carter Smith's sole discretion and direction, TPWD has been destroying perfectly healthy privately owned whitetail deer across the state of Texas under the faux crisis of Chronic Wasting Disease, also known as CWD.  According to the Center for Disease Control, there is no evidence that CWD poses any threat to humans who consume a deer with the disease, nor is there any way the disease could spread to domestic livestock. Infection rates among your average white-tailed deer linger at less than 1%. Infected deer can live quite a long time with the disease, produce healthy fawns, and remain nearly symptom free until their deaths.

Thousands of healthy whitetail deer have been
killed under the direction of Carter Smith, executive
director of the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department.

This effort in Texas is eerily similar to government agency abuse of power on private ownership of big cats, primates, bears, elephants, killer whales, birds of prey, even squirrels and raccoons currently wreaking havoc on law abiding animal owners across America today.  

But in Texas, Carter Smith is using the non-crisis of CWD to take away the rights of law abiding deer owners through deceit, manipulation, and intimidation while forcing his destruction of their property. This is certainly NOT a plan to help animals.

What You Can Do

Please sign the attached petition to urge Texas Governor Abbott to remove Carter Smith from his position at Texas Parks and Wildlife Department. You do not need to be from the state of Texas to sign the petition.

CLICK HERE TO SIGN THE PETITION

For more information about this urgent matter, listen to Alan Warren Outdoors and his episode that directly addresses this issue. Listen HERE

THANK YOU for you for taking action on this important matter.  It is vital that we hold these unelected bureaucrats accountable and require them to abide by the LAW. 

The Cavalry Group Team