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.

Stand Firm and Never Give Up

Since launching The Cavalry Group almost six years ago, I have witnessed, first-hand, a systematic attempt to over-regulate, unfairly inspect, and penalize professional animal enterprises out of business.  

It's fair to say that the origin of this tactic can be traced directly to what we all know as the "animal rights movement," a line of thinking, or ideology, that has gradually gained a foothold in universities and government throughout the past forty years.  What was once a ragtag group of extremists is now a multi-billion-dollar coalition of organizations that raise money under the guise of improving animal welfare and running pet shelters, but ultimately spend that money on the promotion of increased regulation on animal ownership and enterprise with the goal of ending both.

These groups have pushed for unsupported regulatory changes in many states to achieve their goals.  These regulations often mislead state and federal legislators, local committee members, and the general public as to their actual effects and true impact on animal owners, breeders, and animal agriculture. Instead of using facts and science, the activists prey on the emotions.  And, sadly, it is working.

A recent example of this ploy is California AB-485, the Pet Rescue & Adoption Act, statewide legislation crafted by the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) to advance their campaign to halt the sale of puppies, kittens, and rabbits in pet stores sourced from USDA licensed, inspected breeders, while mandating that pet stores source their animals from rescues and shelters.

Pet sale ban legislation has already taken effect in local jurisdictions across America including thirty-three cities in California, fifty cities in Florida, ninety-six cities in New Jersey, and a handful of cities in states like Illinois, Nevada, New York, Pennsylvania, New Mexico, Utah and even, Texas.

In April of this year, I flew to Sacramento and testified before the California Assembly, Business and Professions Committee to oppose AB-485 and found that the legislators were deeply committed to supporting the bill.

Since California legislators and Governor Jerry Brown have been marching in step with the animal rights groups for a while, I wasn't shocked by the overwhelming support for AB-485, but it disappointed me greatly that there is such little regard, not only for pet stores but for the pet breeders, themselves, who provide the pet stores with animals to sell. Animals that consumers demand!

Silly me. I actually believed there would be support for legally operating, tax-revenue-creating businesses in the Business and Professions Committee.

Nope. AB-485 passed the Committee with a 10-1 vote. And, sadly, on September 12, 2017, AB-485 passed the Senate with a vote of 32 out of 40 Senators.

It is well documented that HSUS has been pushing this campaign to ban the sale of animals in pet stores at the local level, state by state, since 2013 with their goal of replacing the sale of purebred and mixed breed puppies in pet stores with adult dogs from rescues and shelters from unknown sources. 

Mandating the sale of animals sourced from unregulated sources, such as rescues, is doing nothing to stop animal abuse or unscrupulous breeders. Pet stores provide an accountable, traceable source for pets and should, at the very least, be acknowledged as legal, legitimate businesses which are self-sustained and bring in a steady stream of tax revenue. But, alas! Lawmakers have bought into the emotional propaganda that USDA licensed facilities are all "mills." Not only do they not approve of breeding, they discourage to the notion that those raise animals should do so for profit.

These pet sale bans are also further proof that one day in the not so distant future owning a purebred dog, much like the Pembroke Welsh Corgis seen in this photo with Governor Brown and his wife, will be difficult to come by and available only to the wealthy elite.

Will purebred dogs become a luxury only for the wealthy elite? Pictured here: Governor Brown and his wife with their two Pembroke Welsh Corgis.

Does this mean we fold up our tent and go home? Absolutely, NOT!  We all must continue to be vigilant in our mission to inform and educate legislators and the public. While animal rights activists and extremists paint a frightening, emotional picture with their propaganda, the truth is that just because animal activists "care" about animals does not mean they know anything about animal care.  Those engaged in actual animal husbandry know far better how to care for animals than even the most well-intentioned urban activists.

Any ban on animals is one more way for the animal rights agenda-driven policy to meet their goal to create a no animal-ownership society. There is no "crisis" to solve. There is only propaganda intended to harm the rights of citizens and to destroy viable law- abiding businesses and the future of animal ownership, and it's up to ALL OF US to take a stand.

Please call and write to California Governor Jerry Brown and ask that he veto AB-485. Make certain that you select "AB00485\Pet Store Operators: Dogs, cats, and rabbits" in the subject line selection. 
Click here 

Thank you! 

Mindy Patterson

President

The Cavalry Group

New Book Reveals Dog Shows Promote Dogs

By Jay Kitchener

Book Review:  The Dog Merchants by Kim Kavin

It takes an activist with a degree in journalism to inform us that dog shows promote dogs, and when two dog shows appear on national television, it’s the cause of all substandard dog breeding.  If Kavin really holds a degree in journalism, she might want to ask for her money back.  It’s not journalism to plagiarize the propaganda of controversial animal rights groups.  The source pages in her book are thick with references from the shady Humane Society of the United States.

A self-described expert on the luxury lifestyle of yachts, Kavin misses the boat when it comes to getting this story right.  Somebody throw her a life preserver.  She’s drowning in propaganda.

When a book claims to “expose” the commercial dog breeding and rescue industries, it gets my attention.  I give this activist credit for visiting the Hunte Corporation’s commercial kennels.  Unable to say anything bad about the Hunte facility, Kavin throws responsible journalism overboard and jumps the shark to claim that televised dog shows cause substandard dog breeding. 

The day before the book’s release, Kavin crowed on the Facebook page for her book, “My op-ed in today's Albany Times-Union, urging New York State lawmakers to go beyond passing ‘pet store puppy mill’ bans and also outright evict the Westminster Kennel Club Dog Show--the type of event that the American Kennel Club itself calls a huge marketing asset for the business model of commercial-scale puppy farms nationwide.”

Calling for the censorship of an annual American television tradition is not journalism, it’s activism.

In the book Kavin flops around like a fish out of water.  She can’t even get a reference to Prohibition right.  She points out the obvious that government prohibition of alcohol created a black market for alcohol.  However, she fails to make the obvious connection that the kind of government prohibition she’s advocating for would create a black market for dogs.

The Prohibition Movement began as a ban on the sale of alcohol on Sundays only.  It seemed reasonable and most folks supported it.  But over time the movement grew and the mission expanded to become a complete ban on the manufacture, sale and consumption of alcohol in public and in private.  This is exactly where we are heading with the kind of government prohibition Kim Kavin is proposing on dog breeding. 

It wasn’t illegal to drink during prohibition, and it won’t be illegal to own a dog in Kavin’s world.  It will just be illegal to breed a dog in Kavin’s world. 

American’s didn’t stop drinking during Prohibition, they just drank different alcohol—bootleg alcohol.

Americans won’t stop owning dogs in Kavin’s world, but they won’t own purebred dogs. 

Led by the controversial Humane Society of the United States, activists in more than 120 communities across the United States have forced their propaganda on local governments and bullied them to mandate that you many not buy a puppy from a professional breeder in a legitimate pet store, and that you may only buy a puppy in the store supplied by a shelter or rescue organization.  The problem is that these shelter and rescue organizations no longer sell animals in need of homes from the local community.  These organizations now primarily sell animals imported from unknown sources in far-away states and foreign countries with no regulation and no oversight.

The bans on the sale of animals in legitimate pet shops from professional breeders presumes that those breeders are unprofessional and sub-standard.  If that’s true, why would Kavin mandate that your next puppy must come from a mysterious place that might be even worse?

These bans mandate that the public may only purchase animals in a pet shop supplied by shelters and rescue organizations.  Animals sold by shelters and rescue organizations are exempt from consumer protection laws that cover animals sold by breeders.  Why would Kavin remove these protections for consumers and animals?

Government is working hard with activists like Kavin to make sure your next puppy comes from mysterious sources. 

What do you call a book based on propaganda?  More propaganda.  The Dog Merchants by Kim Kavin is one activists’ opinion trying to pass as balanced journalism. 

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.

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." 

Activists Announce Pet Shop Ban in Portland, Maine

After failing to achieve a state-wide ban in Maine in 2015 on the four pet shops that sell dogs and cats in the state, activists announced plans this week to re-introduce the ban in Portland, Maine “by the end of the month.”  There are no pet shops that sell dogs and cats in Portland. 

More than 120 communities across the United States have mandated in law that you may not buy a puppy from a professional breeder in a legitimate pet store, and that you may only buy a puppy in the store supplied by a shelter or rescue organization.  The problem is that these organizations no longer sell animals in need of homes from the local community.  These organizations now primarily sell animals imported from unknown sources in far-away states and foreign countries.  This is the phenomenon of retail rescue.

In 2015 the Maine Legislature passed the ban on the sale of professionally bred animals in pet stores with strong bipartisan support.  The governor vetoed the law, and it died.  Now, the same players who failed to get the state-wide ban in Maine are bringing it back at the local level.

One of the biggest supporters of the failed state-wide ban in Maine was Patricia Murphy, Executive Director of the largest shelter in Maine, the Animal Refuge League of Greater Portland.  According to their 2014 IRS 990 forms, this shelter has almost $11 million in assets.  Murphy is paid a salary in excess of $100,000.00.  In addition, this shelter is currently constructing a new facility with a budget of $6.5 million.

In public testimony in 2015 I told the legislature that Murphy’s shelter was importing animals.  Murphy testified after I did, and she took great exception to my statement.  She broke protocol for testifying to the legislature by straying from her script to address my statement.  She emphatically stated, “We do not import animals.”

The facts indicate otherwise.

According to a survey from Maine’s Department of Agriculture, Maine’s shelters imported 45% of their animals from out-of-state in 2014.  The survey shows that 3,436 dogs and 2,060 cats were brought into the state by Maine’s shelters that year.  The latest numbers from 2015 show a dramatic increase in these numbers with 61% of Maine’s shelter animals coming from out-of-state.  Last year Maine’s shelters imported 4,302 dogs and 3,342 cats.  More than half of the animals in Maine’s shelters now come from out-of-state.

But Murphy still believes her shelter doesn’t import animals.

Only days after Murphy claimed her shelter doesn’t import animals, one of her employees shared a post on social media lamenting how she was stuck in Boston’s rush hour traffic as she made her way to Logan International Airport in Boston to pick up a shipment of “sato” dogs.  “Sato” is Spanish for “stray dog”.

The pricelist for animals at Murphy’s shelter is complicated.  Imported animals are more expensive.  Most dogs sell for $300.00.  Imported dogs sell for $350.00.  Imported kittens sell for $200.00 each. 

According to their Facebook page this shelter sold 253 cats and kittens in December 2015.  If the cats were sold for $200.00 each, that’s over $50,000.00 in revenue in one month from cats alone.  That total doesn’t include additional revenue from 61 dogs and puppies and 15 small animals also sold in that month.

According to state statistics, over half of these animals came from out-of-state.

The proposed ban on the sale of animals in legitimate pet shops from professional breeders presumes that those breeders are unprofessional and sub-standard.  If that’s true, why would government mandate that your next puppy must come from a mysterious place that might be even worse?

The proposed ban mandates that the public may only purchase animals in a pet shop supplied by shelters and rescue organizations. For 25 years Maine’s Puppy Lemon Law has been one of the toughest consumer and animal protection laws in the country.  Animals sold by shelters and rescue organizations are exempt from all terms of Maine’s Puppy Lemon Law.  Why would government remove these protections for Maine’s consumers and Maine’s animals?

Government is working hard with the activists to make sure your next puppy comes from mysterious sources. 

Repeated calls to Murphy for comment were not returned.

Jay Kitchener is a leading advocate in the purebred dog industry and has been on the forefront in preserving the rights of dog breeders and animal owners nationwide. Jay serves as the New England Regional Director for The Cavalry Group.