Steve King Hates Animals & Is Ok with Puppy Mills: CALL NOW TO Tell “Your” Rep. and Senator to REMOVE THE KING AMENDMENT FROM THE FARM BILL!!

 Do now.  Evil King is at it again.  Here’s the text and directions:

URGENT ACTION NEEDED. There is an extremely dangerous amendment in the Farm Bill, one that could repeal animal protection laws like puppy mills and even dog meat. Please call your US Representative and Senator at 202-225-3121, asking to remove the King amendment from the final ‪Farmbill. 

• Please make a brief, polite phone call 202-225-3121 to your U.S. Representative and U.S. Senators - action.humanesociety.org/site/PageServer?pagename=electedOfficials_federal.   You can say: "As a constituent concerned about preventing cruelty to animals, I would like you to please help to remove the King amendment from the final Farm Bill and oppose this attack on states' rights." 

• Then, follow up via the link below:

https://secure.humanesociety.org/site/Advocacy?cmd=display&page=UserAction&id=6215&s_src=fb_072913

Help End Puppy Mills in U.S.: Pass the PUPS Act. AND, Video "Where Do Pet Store Puppies Come From?"

Very easy action.  Just go here:

https://bestfriends.capwiz.com/bestfriends//issues/alert/?alertID=62669601

To see the video Where Do Pet Store Puppies Come From?" that discusses the pet store and puppy mill connection, go to http://www.lifewithdogs.tv/2013/05/where-do-pet-store-puppies-come-from/

From the site:

“Under the current requirements of the Animal Welfare Act, commercial dog breeders who produce puppies for commercial resale through pet stores are required to be licensed and inspected by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). However, breeders who sell puppies directly to the public — through classified ads, the Internet and other means — are exempt from any federal oversight.

Because the Animal Welfare Act was enacted well before the birth of the Internet, puppy millers who sell online are able to operate virtually under the radar and don’t even have to provide basic, humane standards of care for their dogs. This loophole has resulted in widespread abuse of dogs in breeding facilities.

Many puppies sold online come from puppy mills, where the conditions are often unsanitary, overcrowded and inhumane. Breeding dogs in mills are typically forced to live their entire lives in small cages with no opportunity for exercise, insufficient veterinary care and minimal human interaction. As a result, puppies purchased online often arrive at their new homes unsocialized, sick or dying, and when purchasers are unable to shoulder the financial and emotional burden of caring for them, many of these puppies are surrendered to our overcrowded shelters.”

News Dump and a Few Key Actions: Get on it!

Ok, here you go.  This is what happens when you run this stuff by yourself; you literally have to just dump it all at once.  Sorry, but that’s my life.  Please read and act.

http://theanimalrescuesite.greatergood.com/clickToGive/ars/petition/DOW-StopADelistingCatastrophe?origin=ARS_FACE_FAN_ADGROUP_TA_WolvesLower48_041613_CTG&utm_source=FB&utm_medium=ARSFAN&utm_campaign=DOW-StopADelistingCatastrophe_041613 – Prevent the delisting of Wolves in ALL THE US STATES.  We’ve seen what happened when they did so for WY, MT, MI, ID.

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/takeaction/134/112/600/?z00m=20543142 -

Urge Congress to Crack Down on Puppy Mills –Pass the Puppy Uniform Protection and Safety (PUPS) Act

https://secure2.convio.net/ida/site/Advocacy?pagename=homepage&page=UserAction&id=2429&autologin=true  - Remembering 10,000 Animals Who Drowned During Superstorm Sandy At New York University Labs

http://www.idausa.org/urge-aza-to-help-elephant-lucky/ - Tell AZA: Don’t Let San Antonio Zoo Keep Elephant Lucky Alone

https://secure2.convio.net/ida/site/Advocacy?pagename=homepage&page=UserAction&id=2437&autologin=true&JServSessionIdr004=3zfkuepqi3.app243b - Another for letting Obama know to actually for once protect wild horses!

http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/boycott-beef-to-save-america-s-wolves-and-wild-horses.html - About the connection between beef and the killing of wolves and wild horses

http://www.seashepherd.org/news-and-media/2013/04/23/sea-shepherd-dam-guardians-report-sea-lion-in-severe-distress-at-port-of-astoria-1497 - On Sea Lions being killed in Oregon.

https://theanimalrescuesite.greatergood.com/store/ars/item/52852/?origin=ARS_FACE_FAN_ADGROUP_GTGM_FeedDogsRescuedFromIllegalMeatTrade_52852_042213 – Help rescued dogs from meat trade in Vietnam.

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=504023696300718&set=a.144782242224867.18192.143706368999121&type=1&ref=nf – INFOGRAPHIC PROVES that wolves account for the least amount of cattle deaths and hence, the rancher and politician argument dies.

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=518298398216614&set=a.212851142094676.52352.180292068683917&type=1&relevant_count=1&ref=nf – Sickos in California want to make it a crime to report animal abuse.  I know, they’re crazy, but they exist.  Take action.

https://www.facebook.com/humanesociety/app_118529078252296 - The Canadian Baby Seal Slaughter continues. 

http://forcechange.com/63663/stop-canadian-wolf-slaughters/?fb_ref=.UW4JepgcE5Q.send&fb_source=message – Canada loves killing seals and Wolves.  Stop the wolf slaughter.

http://www.thewildlifenews.com/2013/04/16/silencing-voters-in-michigan/ - About the silencing of voters in Michigan so that the political interests can keep torturing and killing wolves.  And this one too - http://www.mlive.com/opinion/grand-rapids/index.ssf/2013/04/letters_to_the_editor_8_2.html

Toronto Permanently Bans the Sale of Dogs and Cats in Pet Stores: Victory over Puppy Mills and Pet Stores!

Yes, it’s in Canada, but this should lead to change in the US as well.

Pet Stores are the reason for puppy and kitten mills, or, aka, pet overpopulation and mass killing, all started by breeders.

Anyone with a heart and head knows that adoption from a shelter is the only way to ensure you’re not directly funding cruelty.

To learn more about the evils of pet stores and puppy mills, visit: http://www.humanesociety.org/issues/puppy_mills/

To read more about this story, visit: http://www.lifewithdogs.tv/2011/09/toronto-bans-retail-sales-of-cats-and-dogs/

Puppy Mill - Shadow Mountain Kennel - in Missouri Poses as Rescue Group: HSUS Calls for Investigation

Wow, another liar using lives to profit. I added some paragraphs in below that summarizes the situation, but you can read the whole story at http://www.lifewithdogs.tv/2011/08/mo-puppy-mill-posing-as-dog-rescue-group/

“The HSUS’ complaint contends that Laymon is violating the state’s consumer protection law, also known as the Missouri Merchandising Practices Act, by deceiving the public into believing that the dogs in her operation are rescued from other facilities, when in fact many of the dogs may be coming directly from her puppy mill.”

“The HSUS named Laymon’s breeding facility, Shadow Mountain Kennel, as one of the worst licensed puppy mills in the state in its 2010 and 2011“Missouri’s Dirty Dozen” reports. The kennel received a “dishonorable mention” in both reports based on consumer complaints about sick and dying puppies Laymon allegedly sold over the Internet, as well as USDA and state inspection records citing Laymon for numerous violations of federal and state welfare standards.”

“The violations included excessively matted dogs, inadequate veterinary care, and dirty housing conditions. In 2009, the USDA fined Laymon $7,125 for repeated violations and suspended her license for three years. However, Laymon continues to be licensed by the Missouri Department of Agriculture even though she has been cited by that agency at least 36 times for animal care violations.”

ASPCA Brings Awareness to the Horrors of Pet Stores and Puppy Mills via Campaign “No Pet Store Puppies”

Great group and great campaign. Ever wonder why those in the know tell you not to buy from pet stores? Simply – puppy mills. Learn more about this issue at http://www.nopetstorepuppies.com/

“The campaign raises awareness about puppy mill cruelty and aims to reduce the demand for puppies that come from puppy mills by urging consumers not to buy anything at pet stores or on Web sites that sell puppies.”

Another Great Facebook Page: Stop Puppy Mills

Again, the name says it all. The page can be found at http://www.facebook.com/StopPuppyMills

don't know what a puppy mill is and why they are cruel? Start at this page to learn more - http://www.humanesociety.org/issues/puppy_mills/

Stop Puppy Mills Facebook Page. And, the Article: Cesar Millan: Help Me Stop Puppy Mills. And, Missouri Back to Loving Puppy Mills

First, like this page to keep up on puppy mill news: http://www.facebook.com/StopPuppyMills?sk=wall

Right away you’ll see an article by Cesar Millan titled “Cesar Millan: Help Me Stop Puppy Mills.” If you do not see the link, go to http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/lifestyle/2011/04/21/cesar-millan-care-puppy-mills-help/

Cesar discusses how Missouri is back to loving puppy mills, mostly due to (wow surprise) business looking to kill a recently passed bill. I guess they, like Washington, feel that democracy is over rated. You can read more about that at http://www.kansascity.com/2011/04/14/2801542/missouri-bill-limits-lawsuits.html

Election 2010: Results Bad for Animal Rights

Is it really that much of a surprise? Sadly, no.

As stated in the article below, “…voters in Arkansas, South Carolina, and Tennessee approved constitutional rights to hunt and fish.” Yet, there were a couple bright spots as you’ll also read below.

I’d like to thank the author at http://hcb.typepad.com/hounded_cowed_badgered/ for keeping track of these issues. I’ve pasted in the text below for those in need of quick information, but please do visit the site to read this and more.

Article:

Animal initiatives become law

http://hcb.typepad.com/hounded_cowed_badgered/2010/11/animal-initiatives-become-law.html

I'm sure animal law is on few folks' minds this morning, given the changed legal landscape in our federal government and in many states. It seems safe to say the gains made by Republicans will have little effect on animal welfare, much less animal rights. Only animals in the wild are seriously protected by law, in the form of environmental statutes, and few politicians seem focused on environmental issues.

The election did mean some changes in animal law though, much of it anti-animal. As noted below, voters in six states were asked to vote on animal-related ballot initiatives. The results are in and voters in Arkansas, South Carolina, and Tennessee approved constitutional rights to hunt and fish. North Dakotans rejected Measure 2, which banned the canned hunting of some animals. Measure proponents say "We were out-spent."

On the plus side, Prop 109, a proposed right-to-hunt amendment in Arizona was rejected by voters. Prop 109 was distinct from other right-to-hunt initiatives, since it also shifted the power over hunting and fishing from an administrative agency to the legislature. This political aspect, and the possibility that the law would limit future initiatives, allowed the opposition to paint it as a power grab. And successfully! A second bright spot is the passage, per USA Today, of Prop B, which regulates puppy mills.

Election 2010: Excellent Article Lays Out the Animal-Related Initiatives (Potential Laws) on the Ballots in the Upcoming Election: Any in Your State??

I won’t say much here other than visit this posting at http://hcb.typepad.com/hounded_cowed_badgered/2010/10/on-the-ballot-on-tuesday.html to see if any initiatives are on the ballot in your state. You'll also see that the author tells you how to vote. I’ve posted the text of the article in below as well for quicker reading, but make sure you visit the posting as well.

You’ll also notice that the blog “Animals & Politics” at http://hslf.typepad.com/political_animal/ is listed below. Please also visit this site for more on animal rights-related legislative initiatives.

Article:

Animal law on the ballot

http://hcb.typepad.com/hounded_cowed_badgered/2010/10/on-the-ballot-on-tuesday.html

Animal-related initiatives are on the ballots in several states in this upcoming election. All but one involve hunting and fishing; one concerns the breeding of dogs. Unfortunately, no initiative this year addresses the most commonly abused animals in the U.S., farm animals.

Voters in four states will be asked to vote on a constitutional right to hunt. It's difficult to know what motivates these efforts, except the need for pro-gun groups to energize their hunter members. The NRA says the amendments are needed to head off attempts to limit hunting and fishing by "well-funded anti-hunting activists." This is not a serious statement, given that gun groups have exponentially more power and resources than those few animal rights groups that target hunting.

When these initiatives do pass, as others have, it's not doomsday for hunting opponents. The provisions typically recognize the state's power to regulate---they cover the right to hunt or fish "lawfully" or say these activities are subject to regulation. Courts have treated similar provisions in other states as basically inspirational. The Wisconsin Supreme Court, for instance, has held an amendment establishing the right to hunt "does not affect our analysis of the DNR's authority."

The reasons for animal rights advocates to oppose a constitutional right to hunt are fairly miminal, though they outweigh the nonexistent benefit to animals. If any of these initiatives were voted down, it would mean that pro-hunting groups had wasted their time and money (though who knows, maybe a successful "NO" campaign would make proponents feel ever more paranoid about the alleged threat of animal rights groups). And, if there ever was an attempt to ban hunting---maybe around 2060?---these initiatives would be an impediment. On these symbolic initiatives, a symbolic NO is the way to go.

I've listed each of the ballot items below, with a recommended vote. For more election coverage, check out Animals & Politics, where Michael Markarian has been doing an excellent job, especially on the Arizona and Missouri ballot items.

Arkansas. Issue 1, if passed, would recognize a constitutional right to hunt, fish, and "harvest wildlife." It would also set these activities as the preferred method of wildlife control. The language would benefit from a comma, as a hasty reader might be shocked that "[p]ublic hunting, fishing, and trapping shall be a preferred means of managing and controlling nonthreatened species and citizens...." (The rest of the sentence makes clear humans are not in fact in danger.)

Arizona. Prop 109 would also enshrine a constitutional right to hunt and fish, and make hunting and fishing the preferred method of wildlife population control. In addition, the measure would shift the power to regulate those activities to the legislature, which may in turn, delegate it back to a commission, which presumably would keep doing what its doing. Feeling dizzy? This move contrasts with Arkansas's Issue 1, which expressly retains power for its game and fish commission, which is itself constitutionally based (see amend. 35). In a fine analysis, Kristin Borns and CJ Eisenbarth Hager point out potential problems with some vague language in the measure. Vote NO.

Missouri. Prop B sets regulations for large-scale "puppy mills," including giving dogs space to move around and to exercise. In contrast to the position of some in the debate over Prop 2 in California, it seems unlikely that the proposed regulations could increase the number of animals bred. Rather, it would reduce the scale of breeding operations and (if enforced) improve the conditions of animals being bred. Vote YES.

North Dakota. The North Dakota Constitution already has two provisions recognizing the value of hunting. Measure 2 would criminalize canned hunts of big game and "exotic animals." The measure's proponents claim it reflects "Fair Chase" principles. For folks opposed to factory farming, some of their ideas might be appealing: no breeding programs, no feeders, no government culls. People opposed to animal exploitation for food and recreation, however supposedly benign, could be less easily persuaded. For me, the question is whether fewer animals will be killed or wounded.

Supporters claim canned hunting makes all hunting look bad. Would a NO vote then reduce hunting? I doubt it. This is rare case where criminalizing an act might actually stop abuse. The proprietors of canned hunting ranches are businesspeople and, if there is enforcement, would be forced to shut down. If less canned hunting meant less hunting, I'd say to vote YES. But this is the sort of dispute, between different types of hunters, that I find difficult to find a good ethical position on.

South Carolina. Amendment 1 would recognize a right "to hunt, fish, and harvest wildlife traditionally pursued." The invocation of tradition could be a loophole: it would be hard to argue hunting "traditionally" occurred with high-powered scopes, or fishing with sonar and GPS (not that any law coming down the pike would ban these tools). Vote NO.

Tennessee. An amendment to the constitution would create a "personal right to hunt and fish." Vote NO.

Arnold Schwarzenegger Supports Animal Cruelty by Vetoing a Pair of Bills Related to Convicted Animal Abusers and Puppy Mills

Well, Arnold proves again that he has more respect for animal abusers and less for those attempting to stop animal abuse. Both of these bills were pretty light, and he still vetoed them.

“AB 241 — would have limited the number of potential pets to 50 in the hopes of eliminating large-scale breeding operations colloquially known as “puppy mills…”

“The second bill, AB 243, was also vetoed, but would have required judges to prohibit convicted animal abusers from owning pets for a set period of time.”

Article:

Governor Denies Acts

http://www.dailynexus.com/article.php?a=19443

By Evan Sherwood

Published Tuesday, October 13, 2009

Issue 16 / Volume 90

On Sunday, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger vetoed a pair of bills authored by local assemblyman Pedro Nava aimed at strengthening animal rights.

The defeated legislation, authored by Nava, was part of a three-bill animal rights package Nava shepherded through the California legislature this year. While the governor approved a third law increasing the penalty for attending a dogfight, he vetoed similar bills that would have instituted stricter punishment for animal abuses and put a cap on the number of cats or dogs owned for breeding purposes, respectively.

The later bill — AB 241 — would have limited the number of potential pets to 50 in the hopes of eliminating large-scale breeding operations colloquially known as “puppy mills,” an approach Schwarzenegger did not agree with.

“An arbitrary cap on the number of animals any entity can possess … will not end unlawful, inhumane breeding practices,” Schwarzenegger said in a prepared statement. Nava said he disagreed with the governor and that the cap was not arbitrarily decided.

“We used the best advice from California animal control officers and law enforcement in coming up with that figure,” Nava said.

The second bill, AB 243, was also vetoed, but would have required judges to prohibit convicted animal abusers from owning pets for a set period of time.

Nava said he will reintroduce both bills next year.

“These problems don’t go away just because the governor failed to understand them,” Nava said.

After Shocking Investigation of Horrors Behind Petland, this Holiday Season, the HSUS and GEARI Remind You to Pick a Dog or Cat From a Shelter

The HSUS and GEARI Remind You to Pick a Dog or Cat From a Shelter and Not from a Pet Store that is Supplied by Breeders and Puppy Mills

Here’s a great page on the horrors of puppy mills. Remember, breeders create puppy mills, which in turn feed the pet stores. According to eh investigation carried out by the HSUS regarding Petland, they are egregious supporters of animal cruelty and puppy mills.

Article:

http://www.hsus.org/pets/issues_affecting_our_pets/get_the_facts_on_puppy_mills/

The Humane Society of the United States reveals the results of a shocking investigation revealing that pet store chain Petland Incorporated is the nation's largest retail supporter of puppy mills. Watch our video and then take action.

Los Angeles Reporter Investigates Puppy Mills: Same Sad Reality Found: Pet Stores Fuel Abusive Puppy Mills and Breeding: Death, Disease, and Abuse

Same reality found again. But still, puppy mills and pet stores go on.

We’ve actually posted about the pet store, puppy mill, breeders connection before see this posting for more information - http://geari.blogspot.com/2006/09/pet-stores-and-puppy-mills-why-hsus-is.html

For more information on puppy mills and pet stores and tips on finding and buying dogs, cats, etc. from reputable sources other than pet stores and puppy mills see the following links:

http://www.hsus.org/pets/issues_affecting_our_pets/
get_the_facts_on_puppy_mills/index.html

http://www.hsus.org/pets/pet_adoption_information/
buying_a_puppy/buying_a_puppy/

Stoppuppymills.com

Article:

David Goldstein Investigates Puppy Mills

http://cbs2.com/goldstein/Puppy.Mills.
David.2.719762.html

Reporting

David Goldstein

LOS ANGELES (CBS) ― They're locked in cages. Put there to breed. With little love or attention.

The animal rights group Last Chance For Animals videotaped this puppy mill in Littlerock--near Palmdale.

Hidden behind a fence--more than 100 dogs. They do have a permit to breed from L.A. County--but not from the federal government. The federal animal welfare act says any breeder who sells to a pet store has to have a permit.

With a hidden camera we went into Posh Puppies in Tarzana. Here we found one of their maltese puppies for sale for over $2,000! But when we tried to question the employee--she didn't want us there.

"It's an unlicensed puppy mill yet the dogs come from there? Can I please ask the camera to leave?"

Last week we uncovered this puppy mill also in Littlerock. After our investigation -- L.A. County Animal Control cited the facility for overcrowding--and ordered more than 300 dogs moved out. They also don't have a federal permit.

But it seems Littlerock is fast becoming the puppy breeding capitol of L.A. County. Just around the corner--we found a third facility. In a county inspection last November--they found 274 dogs---which is legal. But again--we found no federal permit. No legal license to sell to pet stores.

"These stores are buying from puppy mills that are not properly licensed. Animals are basically illegal."

Chris Derose is the director of Last Chance For Animals. He blames the puppy mills in L.A. County on the trend in Hollywood.

The cute little dogs are all the rage with celebrities--so people want to follow suit. And breeders are trying to keep up. But the public doesn't see the dark side.

"This little girl's leg is missing."

This dog was rescued from the puppy mill last week with leg problems. Others rescued also are mistreated.

"These dogs pay for it over and over and these people--these celebrities that have animals don't go out and see where these animals come from."

Because of our investigation -- L.A. County supervisor Mike Antonovich is going to introduce a motion to see if further inspections are needed.

Animal Rights News Year End Round Up for 2007 from DawnWatch

What better site to offer such an important synopsis.

Article:

DawnWatch Animal News year end round-up – 2007

http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2008/01/07/18470939.php

by karen dawn

Monday Jan 7th, 2008 10:15 PM

DawnWatch Animal News year end round-up -- 2007

It's Christmas morning. Before I shut down my computer until January 3, 2008, I will enjoy fulfilling what has become a DawnWatch tradition -- a scan of the media stories of the year. Because I feel so blessed to do this work, Christmas morning seems the most perfect time to sum up a year of it.

For dogs, 2007 was the year of "fake fur" coats made from real dog fur, of the Menu pet food crisis, of celebrity pet store blunders, and the year of Michael Vick.

In February the Humane Society released a report telling us it had tested garments being sold at popular outlets and had found many garments labeled faux but containing real fur. Also, fur labeled as raccoon was sometimes from wild dog, or domestic dog, including a German shepherd-collie mix. The story got widespread media play, even in People magazine. While animal advocates may dislike the suggestion that dog fur coats are more repugnant than others, the dog angle got the media. The widespread coverage reminded the public that all fur coats were once live sentient animals.

On March 16, Menu Foods announced a recall of 91 pet food products sold under some of the country's best known brands. Early coverage reported 10-15 cats and dogs dying after eating canned and pouched foods. Sadly, that number was widely repeated by the media even when it became clear that it only included the cats and dogs who died in Menu's test lab -- not the true number of animals, which is estimated to be in the thousands. A superb piece published on the San Francisco Gate website, by Christie Keith, told us "Nearly one month passed from the date Menu got its first report of a death to the date it issued the recall. During that time, no veterinarians were warned to be on the lookout for unusual numbers of kidney failure in their patients. No pet owners were warned to watch their pets for its symptoms. And thousands and thousands of pet owners kept buying those foods and giving them to their dogs and cats." We have since learned, from the Toronto Globe and Mail, that the
chief financial officer of Menu Foods Income Fund sold nearly half his units in the pet food maker less than three weeks before the massive recall. He called the timing a "horrible coincidence."


This year the media occasionally featured Britney Spears and Paris Hilton. Falling into that focus were their purchases of puppies from a Bel Air pet store. For years, with limited success, animal folks have been trying to get the media to cover the horror of the puppy mills that supply pet stores. The Britney and Paris hook did the trick. The story gained momentum throughout the year, with Entertainment Tonight, in October, airing a puppy mill segment recorded for PETA by Charlize Theron some years ago. On the Saturday before Christmas, the biggest puppy buying day of the year, actorvist Carole Davis led others such as Law and Order's Richard Belzer and comedian Carol Leifer, in a protest outside the usually celebrity stocked pet store, and closed it down for the day. The protest got some great media, and you can watch the fun original video covering the event at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IyZdkCi-JzQ


In 2007, the hideous practice of dog fighting finally got massive media attention when Michael Vick was arrested for it. There were reports that he was involved in many dog deaths including the electrocution of a dog after she lost a fight. After failing polygraph tests while denying he killed dogs, Vick finally admitted to hanging a dog and eventually owned up to another dog killing. He was sentenced, in December, to twenty-three months in prison. The dogs taken live from his property have been retired to the Best Friends sanctuary. For a short time there was so much media ,Vick seemed to be the new Britney.


The scandal inspired a storyline on the hit drama series CSI, detailing the cruelties of dog fighting. It aired December 13 under the title "Lying Down With Dogs."

That brings us to the remarkable coverage this year of animal issues on mainstream television, in hit drama and comedy series:

In January, on the popular show "Veronica Mars," Veronica was hired to investigate the disappearance of a monkey stolen from the campus lab. We learn that while the animal rights kids were suspected, the monkey, Oscar, was actually taken by a science student who couldn't bear the thought of the monkey being euthanized, which was Oscar's fate at the lab. Thus millions of American teenagers learned the fates of monkeys who die in laboratories for trivial purposes. Of course, Veronica decided not to turn in the science student for his act of compassion.

Also in January, ABC's Boston Legal took a look at animal testing. Bethany defended Matthew, accused of harassing a woman named Bella who owned a cosmetic company that tested its products on animals. Matthew's organization had been protesting outside the business and saying it kills and tortures animals. When Bethany cross examined Bella, she said: "The truth is, you do kill and torture animals, do you not?...Your company uses rabbits..You lock them in stocks so that just their heads stick out. You clip their eyelids open and poor chemicals into their eyes while they are left there for two weeks to experience ulceration, bleeding, and massive iris deterioration. Do you not subject these animals to excruciating pain?...Sometimes the rabbits break their own necks trying to escape."


Later in the year, in December, David Kelly and Boston Legal took on meat and the environment. In one episode, the head of an environmental organization was distressed to see massive energy waste at the law firm's offices. He sued, claiming that the firm had misrepresented itself as green. Cross examining the head of the green group, the lawyer asked if he eats meat, and explained, "I only ask because studies show eating meat contributes more to greenhouse gases than driving a car. Denny says you two often have rib-eye together. Is that true?" When the defendant said he didn't believe eating meat is worse for the environment than driving a car, the lawyer responded, "It is. Contaminated runoff from slaughterhouses is a major source of water pollution. Livestock itself contributes 18% of greenhouse gases just from, pardon me, farting. That's more than all the planes, trains and automobiles put together."


Boston Legal takes its storylines from current affairs. How wonderful that this year both animal testing and the impact of meat diets on the planet were current affairs deemed important and topical.


Even on comedy shows, serious animal issues were tackled. In April, on The King of Queens, Doug found a live chicken for whom he developed affection. He and the audience were treated by his neighbor to a film about slaughterhouses. Doug went veggie. By the end of the episode he could no longer withstand the onslaught of the fast food advertising campaigns; he gorged on burgers. But the issue was portrayed in such a way that Doug's lack of will power, while funny, was also sad. In fact the topic of animals and meat was handled with surprising sensitivity throughout the episode.


The boys on HBO's Entourage rescued a racehorse who was bound for "the glue factory," reminding viewers of the fate of the losers.


And even reality TV got into the act. On Fox's "The Two Coreys," one Corey supported PETA and invited a PETA representative over to show slaughterhouse footage to the other.


HBO, known for its superb documentaries, this year aired "I am an Animal," about Ingrid Newkirk, the founder of PETA. If you missed it, you can get it "On Demand" or on Netflix. It is a fascinating documentary, which includes animal cruelty information everybody should know - and which, thanks to HBO, quite a few people now do know.

The Wall Street Journal covered Smithfield's announcement that it will phase out sow gestation crates. Those are individual cages in which sows spend much of their lives. They are too small for the animals to turn around or lie down in with legs outstretched. The phase-out will be over ten or twenty years, so we continue to push for bans. This year Oregon became the first state to pass a legislative ban on the crates. In 2008 we hope to make California the third state to do so by ballot initiative. The initiative will include bans on restrictive cages for calves raised for veal, and for laying hens.


Even Wolfgang Puck went welfare, announcing early this year that he would no longer sell foie gras, and that he would introduce animal welfare standards for the meat prepared in his food empire. He also vowed to introduce more vegetarian dishes.


Last year there was much news about elephants; this year some of it turned good. Los Angeles's Ruby was retired to the PAWS sanctuary in Northern California. And Maggie, the lone elephant in Africa for years, has just joined her. The Alaskan zoo finally agreed to let Maggie go after she collapsed in her barn twice in a week, unable to stand without the help of local firefighters. We thought we were going to lose her but she is now safe at the sanctuary.

While we continue to spread the word about the animal cruelty of circuses, unfortunately the widely watched Bachelor took a group date to one this year. But we see other signs of light. Last weekend, as Ringling arrived in Florida, the Palm Beach Post published a searing indictment by Florida radio host Duncan Strauss. You can read it at http://tinyurl.com/ywpr44

The Bachelor also swam with dolphins. The UK Independent did a piece in January focusing on the link between dolphin slaughter and the use of live dolphins for human entertainment -- such as in swim with dolphins programs. It told us that thousands of dolphins are chased and killed, with a few of the best specimens being sold live to the highest bidders, for tens of thousands of dollars each. Only a celebrity ensures coverage in America, and this year, during Japan's annual dolphin slaughter in November, the dolphins got Hayden Panettiere, the young star of Heroes. She accompanied Ric O'Barry to the Taiji killing beach. The media went mad. Shows such as "E" and "The Insider" covered the story. Even though they needed the celebrity hook, the coverage was not fluff. The Insider included horrifying footage and pointed viewers to http://www.savejapandolphins.org/ to get involved and try to help bring the annual slaughter to an end.


Paul Watson and Sea Shepherd's work for the whales was featured in a lengthy New Yorker story, and in an interview on NPR's Diane Rehm Show with the author of Whale Warriors.


Efforts to ban horse slaughter remained in the news through 2007. We learned from a Houston Chronicle front page story that the closure of US slaughterhouses has led to mass trucking of unwanted horses on long journeys to Mexico for slaughter - in facilities where no humane laws apply. The American Horse Slaughter Prevent Act, which would ban not only US horse slaughter but also the transport of horses to slaughter elsewhere, is now needed more that ever. At https://community.hsus.org/campaign/FED_2007_horse_slaughter3 you can send letters to your legislators urging their support.

Animal issues also got indirect but important coverage this year as those who refuse to eat or wear animals hit the trendy mainstream. 2007 was the year of Vegan Chic. We saw Today Show coverage of Vegan accessories, a piece in The Boston Globe on a professional image consultant whose specialty is vegan fashion, an article in Forbes magazine on a high-end vegan shoe-designer, and leading papers publishing articles such as "Style goes vegan."

The New York Times Dining Section featured vegan chef Isa Chandra Moskowitz on its cover, in an article titled, "Strict Vegan Ethics, Frosted With Hedonism." Newsweek broached marriages between vegans and omnivores. And, astounding to many of us, this year Gourmet Magazine announced that it would start running regular vegetarian features, and editor Ruth Reichl wrote "how much more food there would be if we all ate vegetables instead of feeding the plants to the animals and eating their meat." She also wrote, "It is becoming increasingly clear that we ought to change our ways. We live in a society that consumes more meat than any other group in history. There are currently more than three billion domesticated cattle, sheep and goats in the world - and that number does not include the 100 million pigs or the 9 billion chickens that we consume every year in this country alone. Livestock grazing and feed production now use 30 percent of the surface of the planet, and that takes
a toll on the environment. Eating so much meat takes a toll on us as well: Most health professionals agree that we would be better off if we consumed less meat and more vegetables."

The same magazine, in June, covered chicken slaughter, sharing gruesome details of standard practices. Gourmet!
Veganism's move to the mainstream got a push from Skinny Bitch, a vegan diet book that sold well from the start, but which hit the number one spot on the New York Times best seller list after Victoria Beckham was spotted with a copy. 850, 000 copies are now in print!

Vegan fighter Mac Danzig won Spike TV's "Ultimate Fighter" championship.

And the New York Times Magazine section's "7th Annual Year in Ideas" included "Vegansexuality," the term for those who seek intimate partners who share their compassionate lifestyle.

Perhaps vegetarianism saw its hottest mainstream spike when vegan actress Alicia Silverstone promoted vegetarianism in an advertising campaign - naked. If you missed the spot you can still see it at http://www.peta.org/feat/alicia_psa/index.asp.

And check out Jimmy Kimmel's monologue from his September 20 show. It includes a spoof on the ad that is well worth watching. The monologue is on line at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EYOVELcTnu4 and you can skip to 7:50 to watch the Alicia segment.

This year, at Thanksgiving, there were so many articles on vegetarian feasts that DawnWatch couldn't possibly cover them all. I had to "settle" for the New York Times Thanksgiving Day front page article on turkey rescue!

Activists taking the animal protection message into faith based communities made news with a lead article in The Los Angeles Times. The article noted the work of Best Friends, and of the new "animals and religion" program at HSUS, and of Bruce Friedrich from PETA. The Los Angeles Times also covered PETA's undercover investigation of a hen farm run by a Trappist Monastery in South Carolina. We learned that the monks were raising the hens under standard industry conditions, and learned the cruelty of those conditions. Just before Christmas the monastery announced that it will halt its egg farming business.

Also late this year, Foxnews.com published two groundbreaking pieces about shocking cruelty at a pig slaughterhouse - just in time for the Christmas ham season.

We wish Gretchen Wyler had been alive to see them - and all of this years' amazing coverage. In May we lost the Golden Age Broadway star who founded the Genesis Awards, an award show as glamorous as she was, which honors animal friendly media. We will miss her but know that her legacy, the Genesis Awards, is stronger than ever. What a media selection there will be to choose from this year!

I have been working on DawnWatch for eight years. Every year, as I look back and see the immense increase in the amount and depth of coverage of animal issues I get a little weepy. We are getting somewhere. I thank all of you who care. This year I particularly thank the many of you who made my job easier and helped out everybody, by sending me media tips and links when I could not find the time to dig them up. Many of you know I have spent most of the year writing and putting together a book. It is called "Thanking the Monkey: Rethinking the Way We Treat Animals," and will be published by Harper Collins in March. I so look forward to readings and to meeting some of the thousands of wonderful activists behind the email addresses I see on my screen. Your care and commitment is changing the world.


Wishing us all joyous holidays that renew our strength for the compassionate campaigns of 2008,
Yours and the animals',
Karen Dawn


(DawnWatch is an animal advocacy media watch that looks at animal issues in the media and facilitates one-click responses to the relevant media outlets. You can learn more about it, and sign up for alerts at http://www.DawnWatch.com. You may forward or reprint DawnWatch alerts if you do so unedited -- leave DawnWatch in the title and include this parenthesized tag line. If somebody forwards DawnWatch alerts to you, which you enjoy, please help the list grow by signing up. It is free.)

Inherent Cruelty of Puppy Mills / Dog Breeders Begin to be Exposed

For more on the truth behind dog breeders, puppy mills and pet stores see http://geari.blogspot.com/search?q=puppy+mills

Article:

States attempt crackdowns on puppy mills

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070603/ap_on_re_us/puppy_mills_1

By ERIC OLSON, Associated Press Writer Sun Jun 3, 1:41 PM ET

OMAHA, Neb. - Bob Baker has seen the worst of the worst in his 27 years as an animal cruelty investigator.


There was the Missouri breeder who would skimp on food by skinning dead dogs and feeding them to other dogs in his kennel. There was the South Dakota breeder who used a handsaw to amputate the leg of a pregnant Rottweiler, injured in an attack by another dog, in hopes that the Rottweiler would survive long enough to give birth to another litter.

Baker says such cases are the exception, but adds that mistreatment of dogs in large-scale breeding operations remains common and troubling.

"Most breeders learn how to keep their standards just above violating cruelty statutes, but the conditions are still unacceptable," said Baker, a St. Louis-based national investigator for the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. "It's difficult dealing with these people. We file charges on the most egregious ones."

State legislators across the nation are attempting to crack down on rogue breeding operations and pet sellers.

The week after the May 16 rescue of 173 dogs from the property of a Dawson County man, the Nebraska Legislature passed a law that increased the number of state kennel inspectors from one to four and requires new operations to be inspected before opening.

Puppy lemon laws, which let buyers get their money back if health or genetic defects are discovered within a set time, are on the books in 16 states and were introduced in four others this year.

California lawmakers are studying a bill that would require cats and dogs over 4 months old to be spayed or neutered, unless the person caring for them obtains a breeding license.

Laws that would tighten the regulation of retail pet shops are pending in Oregon, Massachusetts and Rhode Island, and bills establishing standards for breeding operations were introduced in Minnesota and Ohio.

Mass breeding has been a hot-button issue for decades with animal welfare activists, who use the term "puppy mills" to describe the most unsavory of operations, which are usually situated in rural areas.

The Humane Society of the United States has long identified Missouri, Iowa, Kansas, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Arkansas, Ohio and Pennsylvania as the major puppy-mill states, said outreach director Stephanie Shain.

Of the 7 million to 9 million dogs brought into U.S. families each year, Shain said, an estimated 2 million to 4 million are products of puppy mills.

The demand for popular breeds, and the high prices people are willing to pay, keep breeding operations churning, Shain said. A quick Internet search showed many puppies with four-figure sale prices, and some breeds, including bulldogs and Belgian Malinois, with top prices exceeding $3,000.

Many dog breeders chafe at the term "puppy mill," saying it is inflammatory and lumps conscientious commercial dog breeders together with the unscrupulous.

Clem Disterhaupt, president of the Nebraska Dog Breeders Association, said most commercial breeders have the animals' best interest at heart.

"We don't associate ourselves with puppy mills, but sometimes people are under the impression that if you have a lot of dogs, you must be a puppy mill," Disterhaupt said.

Disterhaupt said reputable breeders are licensed with state or federal agencies and provide adequate space, cleanliness, heat and air conditioning and ventilation.

"That's not a puppy mill," he said. "People need to distinguish the difference."

Daisy Okas, assistant vice president of communications for the American Kennel Club, said breeders, kennel operators and pet stores register all types of breeds with her organization. The AKC has 15 inspectors who visit about 5,000 places a year where significant numbers of dogs are registered.

Shain, however, said people who want a puppy should avoid pet stores and instead buy from a hobby breeder or adopt from a shelter.

Puppy mills, Shain said, damage dogs emotionally and physically because the animals are confined in tight, unsanitary quarters with little or no socialization with humans or veterinary care. Females are bred repeatedly, some when they're as young as 6 months.

The overbreeding, combined with the dismal environment, results in sickly puppies that have genetic defects and temperament problems, she said. The dogs are sold in pet stores or on the Internet to unsuspecting buyers.

Investigators such as Baker inspect breeding operations after receiving complaints. Breeders usually cooperate, but when they don't, he said, he gathers information by interviewing neighbors and observing the facility from afar.

Baker, who said he has visited more than 750 breeding facilities since 1980, said that when he finds evidence of animal cruelty, he notifies local law enforcement.

"Most abuse we see is neglect," Baker said. "They know some of the stuff they're doing is wrong, and they're embarrassed. They apologize a lot of times when we come see them. But they're blinded by the greed and money they're making off of this.

"Some start out with the right intentions. They breed a few and make money, so they get more dogs but don't put money back in. They get swamped."

____

On the Net:

Humane Society of the United States: http://www.hsus.org

American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals: http://www.aspca.org

Pet Stores and Puppy Mills

Came across this article which exposes the truth behind pet stores and their suppliers – puppy mills.

Article:

The Other Side of the Pet Store Window

People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals – PETA

http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/
viewArticle.asp?articleID=18410

December 28, 2006

By Christina Matthies

Every time I see a shopping mall pet store, I wish I could stand in front of it and show the passersby an elderly Chihuahua named Sophia. Sophia is the reason no one should ever buy an animal from a pet store. Like most dogs for sale in stores, she came from a puppy mill.

When I first met Sophia, I didn’t think she would ever get over her intense fear of humans. The first month I had her, she huddled in the corner of my bedroom and shook with convulsions whenever I looked at her, her large eyes bulging with fear.

Sophia was one of a hundred neglected dogs seized by authorities 14 months ago from a puppy mill in North Carolina. Instead of frolicking in a home with loving guardians, Sophia and her fellow inmates were relegated to dilapidated wood and wire outdoor hutches, denied proper nutrition and veterinary care, given algae-coated water and forced to sit in their own waste. Like Sophia, most of the dogs were small breeds: Chihuahuas, Boston terriers, Shih Tzus and others. They were being exploited for the sole purpose of making money for their owner.

Puppy mills are a thinly veiled “secret” in the pet store industry. The little bundles of joy in pet stores come from puppy mill mothers like Sophia, who are forced to bear litter after litter, with dire consequences to their health. Male breeders are stuck in cages, treated like assembly-line objects, and both males and females are thrown away when they can no longer reproduce. The puppies they give birth to are usually sick—infested with parasites and infected with viruses and diseases on top of the genetic problems they’ve inherited from their worn-out parents.

Puppy mill dogs are never touched with a loving hand, fed treats, given soft beds or chew toys or taken for walks. Their basic physical needs are unmet and they are emotionally ignored. And they carry their wounds with them. When People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) gained temporary custody of 20 of the North Carolina puppy mill breeding dogs, I agreed to foster six of them. I was totally unprepared.

Most of them were so scared of people that even if gently touched, they would lose control of their bowels. They had infections, parasites and untreated broken legs that had calcified and healed improperly. When I lifted a camera to snap a picture, they scrambled against the wall, their bodies trembling so hard I thought they would collapse. They would do anything to get away from me, which made giving them their medicine for all their ailments next to impossible. It soon became clear that I had a lot of making up to do for the human race.

Now, I’m proud to say, a lot of that fear is gone.

Sarah, a Chihuahua mix who spent the first year or more of her life in a cage, enjoys playing tricks on my son, stealing his socks and toys and running away with them when he isn’t looking. Chandler, one of the youngest of the bunch, no longer cowers in fear but rolls onto his back to have his belly scratched when he’s done playing with his new friends—three large shepherd mixes. Theresa, another little Chihuahua mix, is slowly learning to trust me and recently started touching my legs affectionately when she thinks I’m not looking. And Sophia, the one I thought would never trust humans, sleeps curled up in a queen-sized bed, snoring like a contented freight train as her new foster mom desperately tries to get some sleep.

The best way to help dogs like Sophia is to refuse to buy animals from pet stores. There are millions of dogs and cats in animal shelters across the nation waiting for homes. All of them are special and all have something to offer. If you have the time and resources to share your home with one—or better, two—of them, go to your local animal shelter and adopt. It’s time to put the puppy mills out of business.

Christina Matthies is a proud foster mom and writer for People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), 501 Front St., Norfolk, VA 23510; www.HelpingAnimals.com.

President of HSUS Publishes Year Review: Unfortunately, Permanent Horse Slaughter Ban and Animal Fighting Bills Will Have to Wait Until 2007

A good summation of the major bills and their essential defeat this year. We’ll see what happens next year. In the mean time, Horses will be slaughtered and dog and cock fights will go on.

https://community.hsus.org/humane/notice-
description.tcl?newsletter_id=5732066

The close of the 109th Congress brings mixed news for animal advocates. We passed some major legislation we can all be proud of, but other important reforms fell just short of final passage, even though we clearly had the support of the vast majority of House members and Senators on these measures.

During this Congress, there were some major legislative victories. In particular, the Congress passed bipartisan legislation to establish state and national disaster planning for animals -- and there had been no national disaster planning for animals prior to the enactment of this legislation. In addition, the Congress closed a tax loophole for trophy hunters that they had been exploiting to finance their worldwide hunting excursions.

Permanent Horse Slaughter Ban Comes Closer than Ever

Permanent Horse Slaughter Ban Comes Closer than Ever
This Congress stirred in a major way on the issue of banning horse slaughter. We forced the issue to the floor multiple times, and every time it came up, lawmakers sided with horse protection (five times in the House and one time in the Senate). In 2005, both the House and Senate overwhelmingly approved legislation to defund federal inspections at horse slaughterhouses, but the USDA -- responsible for slaughterhouse oversight -- skirted the new federal law by allowing the foreign-owned plants to pay for their own inspections.

On September 7, 2006 the U.S. House voted in an overwhelming bipartisan vote (263-146) to pass H.R. 503, the American Horse Slaughter Prevention Act -- favoring animal advocates over the agriculture lobby in passing a bill to establish a permanent ban on horse slaughter. The Senate version of the bill, S.1915, received the support of 33 cosponsors but did not come up for a vote before the clock ran out. Senator Conrad Burns (R-MT), who was defeated for re-election, acted as the major impediment to Senate consideration of this legislation. With him out of the way in 2007 and our lead sponsors returning to the Senate, our chances in the Senate are brighter than ever.

Animal Fighting Bill Poised for Passage in 2007

Animal Fighting Bill Poised for Passage in 2007
The Animal Fighting Prohibition Act also got remarkably close to passage, and it was largely one man who held it up. The bill unanimously passed the Senate, but House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Sensenbrenner (R-WI) used his position to block final House consideration of the legislation, even though the bill had 324 cosponsors. With Democrats now in the majority, and a strong animal advocate, Rep. John Conyers (D-MI), taking the helm at the House Judiciary Committee, we are very optimistic about the likelihood of passing this legislation.

We are also poised next year to pass bills to crack down on the primate pet trade and on puppy mills. We will make a major push to outlaw canned hunts and Internet hunting, and much more. Although rank-and-file Republican and Democratic lawmakers have led the way for animal protection legislation and members of both parties have supported our initiatives, Republican leaders and committee chairmen have often been roadblocks. With many animal-friendly Democrats in charge, we have historic opportunities to make progress. You can see how all legislators in the 109th Congress scored on animal protection issues at www.humanescorecard.org.

The 110th Congress convenes on January 3, 2007 and we will be there ready to make our voices heard through phone calls, letters, emails, and faxes to ensure American horses are protected from cruel slaughter. Our success thus far has been possible only because of your advocacy and your continued support and pressure. We are counting on you to stay in this fight. Let's work together to make history for animals in 2007.

Sincerely,

Wayne Pacelle
President & CEO
The Humane Society of the United States

Group Exposes Amish Puppy Mills: Undercover Video Exposes Horrible Conditions and Abuse

The truth hurts, but it is the truth. Please visit the site at: http://www.awawatchdog.com

“Lancaster County Pennsylvania is better known as the "Puppy Mill Capital of the East Coast". In this month's AWAwatchdog we'll take a look into the Amish dog farming industry.”

To Attend to Slander and Falsehoods Put Out by Business Paid Lobbyist and PR Groups, HSUS Launches Eye on the Opposition

A great idea. I’m amazed that money interests actually trump truth in the eyes of these sick groups. Well, now they’re being watched, and unlike them, the HSUS will report the truth.

You can find out more at:

http://www.hsus.org/about_us/about_hsus_programs_
and_services/eye_on_the_opposition/


Eye on the Opposition

It's no secret that The Humane Society of the United States doesn't see eye-to-eye with some people and organizations over animal protection. These groups typically have a vested interest in some form of animal use—it could be trophy hunting or cockfighting or greyhound racing—and they instinctively view The HSUS as a threat to the status quo.

To protect their own interests, these animal-use groups routinely resort to smear campaigns and high-powered spin control to confuse the public about their practices. The disinformation can be deafening at times. For these reasons, and others, The HSUS has launched its Eye on the Opposition campaign to keep tabs on those who would do animals harm. We will publish regular columns under this banner with the hope of lifting the fog of disinformation generated by others. We plan to set the record straight and unmask those who abuse animals for profit or leisure.


Article:

Legal Concerns: ALEC Looks to Turn Animal Activists into Domestic Terrorists

http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2006/11/14/18329693.php

November 20, 2004

By Michael Satchell

The events of September 11, 2001 have re-ordered the lives and values of many Americans. Tough new anti-terrorism measures have been implemented, and freedoms and civil liberties long taken for granted have begun to erode. In the name of homeland security, travel restrictions, personal searches, identity checks, surveillance cameras, and military patrols are now everyday facts of life.

This new climate of heightened security has also provided an opening to target domestic lawbreakers. In their zeal to look tough, conservatives have cited groups like the Animal Liberation Front (ALF) and the Earth Liberation Front (ELF) to justify pushing state legislation against so-called "animal rights and eco-terrorists"—despite the fact that destruction of property, stealing private property, and threatening violence are already serious offenses.

The punitive new laws—already on the books in Oklahoma and California, and currently proposed in Hawaii, Missouri, New York, South Carolina, and Washington state—not only increase penalties for the aforementioned (or lesser) crimes, but also seek to have a chilling effect on all forms of social and political activism. Some of these broadly written laws could potentially define any non-violent, law-abiding animal or environmental activist as a "domestic terrorist."

What historically has been a legally protected form of dissent and protest could suddenly become an act of domestic terrorism—non-violent animal advocates lumped into the same category with legitimate targets like foreign hijackers and home-grown arsonists. The HSUS and our friends in law-abiding animal-protection and environmental groups are all potential criminals under new state statutes.

"We agree with the criticisms of those who resort to violence in the name of animal protection," says Wayne Pacelle, a senior vice president of The HSUS. "But we don't want to allow political opponents of animal and environmental protection to leverage legitimate societal concerns about terrorism in order to institute indefensible restrictions on non-violent and long-permissible forms of dissent."

It's already too late in some states. Last April, for instance, Oklahoma enacted a new law against trespassing on a farm. Causing a disruption (whatever that means) or damaging property is now punishable by a felony jail term and a $10,000 fine. On January 1, California bumped up penalties for farm trespass from a citation and a $10 fine to six months in jail and a $1,000 fine.

Similar measures came very close to passage in Illinois and Missouri, where the legislatures approved bans on photographing puppy mills. If not for conference committees, which stripped out the bans in the 11th hour, both bills would have become law.

The Man Behind the Curtain

So who or what are behind these new laws? The impetus for them comes from the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), a tax-exempt Washington-based organization that is financed to the tune of $5 million-plus annually by corporations. ALEC's main function is to bring together state lawmakers (2,400 of them are members, a number that reportedly represents a third of all state lawmakers) and corporate representatives in so-called "task forces" to draft "model" legislation on a raft of right-wing issues. These task forces cover such issues as health care, criminal justice, tax policy, education, economic development, and transportation.

But since 9/11, ALEC has also turned its attention to drafting laws aimed at "animal rights activists and terrorists." ALEC ominously calls its model legislation "the Animal and Ecological Terrorism Act" (AETA). Once drafted, the legislation often finds a receptive audience among ALEC's "legislator members," who may be influenced by perks such as junkets to prime tourist destinations and Broadway theater tickets.

ALEC claims its model eco-terror act is justified because of the escalating violence by ALF, ELF, and similar groups. ALEC cites FBI statistics listing 600 criminal acts since 1996, with damages totaling close to $50 million. "The legislation specifically addresses actions that are designed to intimidate, coerce, invoke fear, or other forms of terror that are committed in the name of environmental or animal rights activism," ALEC argues.

That may be, but the proposed state laws based on the AETA model are written so broadly that such innocuous activities as fundraising, lobbying, photographing abuses, or even picketing and protesting could be treated as criminal acts. Consider this language, imported from ALEC's model legislation, contained in a Senate bill in Washington state:

" 'Animal rights or ecological terrorist organization' means any association…or combination of two or more persons with the primary or incidental purpose of supporting any politically motivated activity through intimidation, coercion, fear, or other means that is intended to obstruct, impede, or deter any person from participating in an activity involving animals, activity involving natural resources, animal facility, research facility…" (Emphasis added.)

Or these prohibitions in last year's House bill in Texas, which forbid: "Entering the facility to take photographs or a video recording with the intent to defame the facility or the facility's owner…" (Emphasis added.)

And "A person commits an offense if the person knowingly provides financial support, resources, or other assistance to an animal rights…organization for the purpose of assisting the organization in carrying out an act …" (Emphasis added.)

Broad and nebulous catch-all phrases like "other means," "obstruct, impede, or deter," "defame the facility or the facility's owner" and "provides financial support, resources or other assistance" would almost certainly violate constitutionally protected political activity and free speech.

Consider what such language could cover: It could cover nonviolent civil disobedience and other forms of activism, including demonstrations, letter-writing campaigns, and fundraising. This legal overkill could make criminals out of bunny huggers. "Holding a bake sale to support tree sitters could be a terrorist offense," quips the Sierra Club's Andrew Becker.

The Chilling Effect

Threatening law-abiding activists with felony arrests and branding them with terrorist labels are ways of intimidating them from gathering information, demonstrating peacefully, committing acts of nonviolent civil disobedience, and other forms of constitutionally protected political dissent. To ratchet up the pressure, ALEC's animal and eco-terror law also allows plaintiffs to sue for triple damages, and calls for property forfeiture by defendants.

What's more, under the model laws, those found guilty would have their photograph and personal information posted on a statewide "terrorist registry" web site—as if they were convicted child molesters or other sex offenders. Not surprisingly, the U.S. Sportsmen's Alliance, a hunting advocacy group of middling influence, has jumped on the anti-animal bandwagon and teamed with ALEC to help introduce the eco-terror legislation in several state capitals.

Animal-protection organizations, including The HSUS, have argued that these laws, particularly the measures passed in Oklahoma and California, are just thinly veiled attempts to prevent the investigation and documentation of abuses on factory farms and other commercial animal operations.

"The fact is, animal abuse often occurs on private land," says Pacelle. "There are times when documenting abuse on private lands is necessary for the prosecution of individuals committing acts of cruelty or for the exposure of systemic abuse that policy makers need to address. ALEC's model legislation is designed precisely to thwart those worthy aims."

When The HSUS investigates the myriad cruelties heaped upon animals in hog factories, egg production plants, slaughterhouses, puppy mills, canned hunts, fur farms and other animal enterprises, the activities are designed only to document conditions. "Investigating potential cruelty is a crucial function that we, and others, provide in order to allow an informed debate on how animals are treated in our society," Pacelle notes.

Tilting Right

Today's ALEC has swung far to the right of the organization founded in 1973 by conservative activist Paul Weyrich and a handful of state legislators, who were looking to oppose liberal groups on social issues like abortion and women's rights. In its joint critical analysis of the organization, Defenders of Wildlife and the Natural Resources Defense Council call ALEC "an insidious…corrosive, secretive and highly influential power in state capitals across the nation."

In the 1980s, ALEC began tapping big business for support, and today some 300 large companies each pay up to $50,000, plus additional fees, each year to help draft favorable laws and influence state legislative agendas. As a tax-exempt matchmaker between legislators and corporate giants in the oil, insurance and airline industry (to name but a few), ALEC purports to be a bipartisan "good government" group operating in the public interest. In fact, its state legislative officers and ALEC's directors are overwhelmingly Republican, and represent the most conservative wing of the party.

What's more, ALEC brags on its web site that more than 100 legislative members "hold senior leadership positions in their state legislatures, while hundreds more hold important committee leadership positions." That's an important point given the nature of state legislatures: They are often made up of underpaid, part-time lawmakers, usually dealing with a confusing blizzard of bills in brief and often-frantic sessions.

ALEC's model bills can find a receptive audience in these chambers, particularly when the bills are pushed by senior leaders or committee chairs who have perhaps enjoyed a few of those previously mentioned perks. This arrangement survives in most states because of weak public-reporting requirements; lawmakers simply may not have to report their largesse.

ALEC's well-financed advocacy is proving to be remarkably effective for corporate America—and threatening to advocacy groups like The HSUS. In the 1999-2000 legislative cycle, the group introduced more than 3,100 pieces of legislation, and more than 450 new laws were enacted.

All this legislative activity under ALEC's banner raises an important point: How does a 501(c)(3) organization like ALEC deal with the lobbying restrictions placed on such non-profits? It's a question we couldn't answer by looking at the organization's Form 990, which it files with the Internal Revenue Service annually. We looked at five years' worth of 990s, from 1998 to 2002, and on every one of those forms, here's what ALEC reports for lobbying expenditures: zero.

"Legislators need to see through the smoke and mirrors of ALEC's efforts," concludes Pacelle. "Our nation's most important reforms—whether civil rights, women's rights, or environmental protections—have come through a blend of sound ideas and sensible and determined political activism. Such efforts need to be protected because our work as a society in halting the abuse of the weak and disempowered is hardly complete."

Journalist Michael Satchell is a former senior consultant for The HSUS.

Pennsylvania Governor Puts Forth Measures to More Closely Regulate Puppy Mills: Measure Also Address Cruelty Conditions of Puppy Mills

These are incredible moves. Just simply adding more inspectors will help immensely. In fact, the lack of inspectors is usually to blame for not enforcing cruelty measures in any setting. Yet, he has also included new regulations which would certainly help. At the very least, this sends a signal to the cruel puppy mills that they are now being watched. Well, we’ll wait and see how it all ends. Let’s hope it’s not just another political maneuver.

Here are some excerpts from the article below the state what will be done:

“Governor Ed Rendell appointed a new head of the state's bureau of dog law enforcement, named a special prosecutor, and created a team of inspectors to police about 2,800 kennels.

New regulations, which also need approval by legislators, include doubling cage sizes; requiring all dogs to be exercised for at least 20 minutes a day, and setting minimum standards of temperature, lighting, ventilation and sanitation in the kennels.”

For more on the cruelty behind puppy mills see:

http://www.hsus.org/pets/issues_affecting_our_pets/get_
the_facts_on_puppy_mills/index.html

http://www.kimtownsend.com/whatisapuppymill.html


Article:

Pennsylvania moves to end cruelty at "puppy mills"

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20061017/us_nm/life_puppies_dc_1

By Jon HurdleTue Oct 17, 4:54 PM ET

Pennsylvania unveiled measures on Tuesday to crack down on commercial kennels that breed dogs in inhumane conditions across a state that has one of the biggest concentrations of so-called puppy mills in the United States.

To strengthen the application of existing law, Governor Ed Rendell appointed a new head of the state's bureau of dog law enforcement, named a special prosecutor, and created a team of inspectors to police about 2,800 kennels.

"We have a very serious problem with the regulation and sale of dogs in Pennsylvania," Rendell said at a news conference. "The state has become known as the puppy mill capital of the country."

Rendell, a Democrat who is running for re-election on November 7, proposed legislation that would strengthen criminal penalties for kennel owners found guilty of cruelty; allow dog wardens to seize dogs in distress, and revoke the license for 10 years of any kennel owner found guilty of cruelty.

Rendell hopes to introduce the legislation by the end of the year.

New regulations, which also need approval by legislators, include doubling cage sizes; requiring all dogs to be exercised for at least 20 minutes a day, and setting minimum standards of temperature, lighting, ventilation and sanitation in the kennels.

Other states with significant numbers of puppy mills include Missouri, Arkansas, Oklahoma and Nebraska, according to the Humane Society of the United States.

Animal-rights campaigners have protested for years against the conditions endured by thousands of dogs kept permanently in cramped and unsanitary conditions. Adult dogs are continuously bred until they reach the end of their reproductive life, and are then destroyed, according to activists.

Because of the inhumane conditions of the kennels, the puppies produced there often have health, genetic and behavioral problems when they are sold to pet stores.

Bob Baker, a consultant with the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to animals, welcomed the Pennsylvania initiative which he said put the state in the forefront of a national effort to regulate puppy mills.

"We are delighted with the proposals," Baker said. "This is a significant step forward in enforcement, and it is significant that (Rendell) also wants to improve the regulations. No other state compares."

Baker estimated that Pennsylvania's puppy mills produce at least 200,000 puppies a year.