Page 1 of 330 The Monthly National Legislation Report 7/5/2010 ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

The Monthly National Legislation Reporthttp://mnlreport.typepad.com/Page 14 of 3307/5/2010Comments (0)June 04, 2010MAY, 2010JOINING HANDS WITH US THIS MONTH !!We welcome the following new organizations to our ever growing list of links !!MISSOURI PET BREEDERS ASSOCIATIONILLINOIS ALLIANCE FOR ANIMAL OWNERS RIGHTSINDIANA HORSE COUNCILUNITED STATES KERRY BLUE TERRIER CLUBKERRY BLUE TERRIER FOUNDATIONMINNESOTA PET LAW**************************************************************************************************************************ARTICLES OF INTEREST ...Press Release - 4/29/10 - APHIS to Issue Animal Welfare Enforcement InformationWASHINGTON, April 29, 2010 - The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) will begin issuing press releasesannouncing the outcome of enforcement actions it has taken in response to violations of the Animal Welfare Act (AWA).“It is clear that certain repeat offenders are not taking issues of animal welfare and humane treatment seriously enough,” APHIS Administrator Cindy Smith said.“In turn, APHIS will not only be moving more swiftly to take enforcement action, but we will be making information about those enforcement actions available to the public on our Web site.”Beginning in June, APHIS will issue monthly press releases that include case summaries where the agency is charging people and businesses with violations of the AWA. The pressreleases will also provide summary information about closed enforcement cases and penalties levied.The agency previously issued press releases of this nature, but discontinued the practice in 2002.Note to Reporters: USDA news releases, program announcements and media advisories are available on the Internet and through Really Simple Syndication (RSS) feeds. Go to the APHISnews release page at www.aphis.usda.gov/newsroom and click on the RSS feed link. To receive APHIS releases automatically, send an e-mail message tolyris@mdrdlyriss10.aphis.usda.gov and leave the subject blank. In the message, type subscribe press_releases.____________________________________________________________________________________USDA fails to crack down on puppy mills - May 25, 2010WASHINGTON — Federal investigators have uncovered grisly conditions at puppy mills around the country where dogs were infested with ticks, living with gaping wounds and in pools offeces, according to a disturbing new report that placed the blame on lax enforcement.Investigators say the Agriculture Department agency in charge of enforcing the Animal Welfare Act often ignores repeat violations, waives penalties and doesn't adequately documentinhumane treatment of dogs.In one case cited by the department's inspector general, 27 dogs died at an Oklahoma breeding facility after inspectors had visited the facility several times and cited it for violations.The review, conducted between 2006 and 2008, found more than half of those large kennels — known as puppy mills — had already been cited for violations flouted the law again.The report recommends that the animal care unit at the USDA's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service immediately confiscate animals that are dying or seriously suffering, and bettertrain its inspectors to document, report and penalize wrongdoing.Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack said Tuesday the department takes the report seriously and will move to immediately improve enforcement, penalties and inspector training. He noted theinvestigation was conducted before his time in office and called it troubling."USDA will reinforce its efforts under its animal welfare responsibilities, including tougher penalties for repeat offenders and greater consistent action to strongly enforce the law," he said.The investigators visited 68 dog breeders and dog brokers in eight states that had been cited for at least one violation in the previous three years. On those visits, they found that first-timeviolators were rarely penalized, even for more serious violations, and repeat offenders were often let off the hook as well. The agency also gave some breeders a second chance to correcttheir actions even when they found animals dying or suffering, delaying confiscation of the animals.The agency placed too much emphasis on educating the violators instead of penalizing them, the report added."The agency believed that compliance achieved through education and cooperation would result in long-term dealer compliance and, accordingly, it chose to take little or no enforcementaction against most violators," the report said.In the case of the Oklahoma breeding facility where 27 dogs died, the breeder had been cited for 29 violations, including nine repeated violations, from February 2006 to January 2007. Theinspector returned in November 2007 before any enforcement action had taken place, according to the report, and found five dead dogs and "other starving dogs that had resorted to
The Monthly National Legislation Reporthttp://mnlreport.typepad.com/Page 15 of 3307/5/2010cannibalism."Despite these conditions, the inspectors did not immediately confiscate the surviving dogs and, the report says, 22 additional dogs died before the breeder's license was revoked.The inspector general also noted that some large breeders circumvent the law by selling dogs over the Internet. Inspectors said they identified 112 breeders in the eight states they monitoredthat were not licensed by USDA and thus not eligible for inspections.Wayne Pacelle, president of the Humane Society of the United States, said the report confirms what animal rights groups have been charging for years."Enforcement is flaccid, the laws are weak and reform needs to happen," he said. "We have long criticized having the animal welfare enforcement functions within a bureaucracy dedicated topromoting American agriculture. There's a built-in conflict of interest."Sens. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., and David Vitter, R-La., said Tuesday that they are introducing legislation to close the loophole in the law that allows breeders to operate online. Both senators saidthey will work with USDA to ensure changes are made throughout the agency.The inspector general's office conducted three previous reports in the last 20 years, the latest in 2005, all of which also found shortcomings with the agency's enforcement of the AnimalWelfare Act.Online: USDA Inspector General report: http://www.usda.gov/oig/webdocs/33002-4-SF.pdf____________________________________________________________________________________The Humane Watch - By Raj Salwan – 5/24/10There's a battle brewing, and it is not terrorism or presidential politics. This conflict centers on our domesticated pets and is generating heated debates, controversial laws and impassioned pleas for help. On thesurface, the welfare of America's pets seems to be at the center of the battle, but are there other motives?The images are designed to inflame our anger and tug at our hearts. Severely matted dogs, wounded cats and emaciated horses linger on the television screen and in our minds. Throughoutthe 90-second infomercial, celebrity voices plead with us to open our hearts, and our wallets, to save these poor creatures.The Humane Society of the United States has spent more than 50 years standing on the front lines in the battle against animal cruelty. From raids on "puppy mills" and animal hoarders tohelping enact legislation for more humane conditions at farms and feedlots, HSUS considers itself the largest and most effective animal protection organization in the world. So, with such apositive agenda, why would anyone criticize their efforts?Critics of HSUS claim that the tear-jerking commercials mislead animal lovers into donating $19.95 per month that is then used to fuel questionable lobbying efforts, pay six-figure salariesand fund yet more infomercials.HumaneWatch.org, an organization dedicated to "watching the Humane Society," issued a news release detailing a survey in which more than 70 percent of respondents believed that HSUSis an "umbrella organization for local humane societies." Not true.Beyond that, more than 60 percent of surveyed adults believe that their local animal shelter is actively associated with HSUS. Fifty-nine percent believed that HSUS used donations toprovide care and support at their local humane organizations. Again not true.The FAQ section on the HSUS website says "local humane societies and SPCAs are independent entities and are not run by the HSUS." Furthermore, HumaneWatch has evaluated IRSforms from HSUS and found that less than half of 1 percent of donated moneys went to the care of dogs and cats in local shelters. The total returned to local shelters in 2008 was less than$500,000 out of $100 million raised.More than $2 million went to the Californians for Humane Farms, a political committee that was the driving force behind controversial Proposition 2. Production animal experts say the bill isfraught with unintentional consequences. They claim it is a law based on emotion and not science, and one that has the potential to cause a dramatic rise in the cost of food and put manyfarmers out of business.Some agricultural groups believe that this type of law is merely a steppingstone toward removing meat from our diet.The Humane Society counters HumaneWatch claims by stating that they "provide direct care for thousands of animals at our sanctuaries and rescue facilities." What is left unsaid is thatthese five facilities are focused on the care of wildlife and animals "rescued" from circuses, zoos, farms and laboratories. While HSUS does not run an actual shelter, it does provide fundingfor many spay/neuter organizations.Even local animal shelters and humane groups often are left wondering about the motives of HSUS. Some small shelters have been overwhelmed with animals after well-publicized "raids" bythe HSUS and feel that the Humane Society should offer more financial support.After an amazing bust of an eight-state dog fighting ring, the Humane Society of Missouri, along with many other local groups, ended up caring for the 450 dogs rescued that day. Despitereceiving extensive media attention and using images of one of the dogs as a fundraising initiative, the HSUS initially did not contribute any moneys to the dogs' care. Finally, after an outcryon many pet blogs, $5,000 was given to one of the rescue groups.As an animal protection organization, HSUS has done much to help criminalize abuse of animals. Their legislative efforts have helped pass animal protection bills in almost every state. Theirlobbying and legislative experience enables them to take on larger animal welfare concerns beyond the reach of local groups.But critics increasingly are concerned with what they see as a lack of transparency with how donations from millions of animal lovers are being spent. Many who donate to HSUS see theirlocal shelter struggle financially to care for the homeless and stray pets in their community. They believe their donation to HSUS is going to help those animals. Instead, it appears that thebulk of Americans' donations fund efforts to make laws based on emotion rather than fact and, of course, for more fundraising.If you wish to help your local shelter, give to it directly so you know your money and your time will be used to help pets in your community. Talk with your veterinarian or local shelter managerabout what groups have the biggest needs and how you can help. It's the best way to insure that your donation will have the biggest impact.Raj Salwan, a second-generation veterinarian, has been involved in veterinary medicine for more than 21 years. Contact him at drsalwan@aol.com or www.americananimalcare.com.____________________________________________________________________________________(6/2/10) – Richmond Hts., Ohio - Investigator Exclusive: Suburban homeowner arrested for barking dog. -- In a wake-up call for dog owners, a woman was arrested by police late lastmonth for being cited a second time for her barking dog. Nancy Hocking, of Gilmer Lane, says she keeps the dog for protection after several items were stolen from her yard in acondominium complex. "The officer came back with the complaint signed," said Hocking. "He goes 'you're under arrest.' Hands behind my back. Didn't even read me my rights. Cuffedme...fingerprinted me... as any other criminal would be." It turns out a second loud barking offense in Richmond Heights is a low-level misdemeanor that requires the defendant to be arrestedand post bond. "It's ridiculous," said Hocking. "It's making criminals out of dog owners." But Lyndhurst Municiapl Judge Mary Kaye Bozza said the ordinance requires all defendants chargedwith such misdemeanors to post bond, not just dog owners. "I follow the law," said Bozza. "This court follows the law. I don't have any personal feelings." It might be the law in RichmondHeights, but Channel 3 News found it is out of the norm in other suburbs. We called five cities and none of them say a second dog-barking offense as a mandatory arrest. Those departmentsdetermine how to handle dog owners on a case-by-case basis, and a couple could not remember anyone being arrested for owning a barking dog. Hocking wonders where it will end. "If youget arrested on a dog barking, what do they do, put you in the electric chair if your dog bites?"____________________________________________________________________________________Marmaduke Movie Educational Effort
Page 2: The Monthly National Legislation Re
Page 6 and 7: The Monthly National Legislation Re
Page 50: The Monthly National Legislation Re
Page 65 and 66:
The Monthly National Legislation Re
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143 and 144:
Page 145 and 146:
Page 147 and 148:
Page 149 and 150:
Page 151 and 152:
Page 153 and 154:
Page 155 and 156:
Page 157 and 158:
Page 159 and 160:
Page 161 and 162:
Page 163 and 164:
Page 165 and 166:
Page 167 and 168:
Page 169 and 170:
Page 171:
Page 174 and 175:
Page 176 and 177:
Page 178 and 179:
Page 180 and 181:
Page 182 and 183:
Page 184 and 185:
Page 186 and 187:
Page 188 and 189:
Page 190 and 191:
Page 192 and 193:
Page 194 and 195:
Page 196 and 197:
Page 198 and 199:
Page 200 and 201:
Page 202 and 203:
Page 204 and 205:
Page 206 and 207:
Page 208 and 209:
Page 210 and 211:
Page 212 and 213:
Page 214 and 215:
Page 216 and 217:
Page 218 and 219:
Page 220 and 221:
Page 222 and 223:
Page 224 and 225:
Page 226 and 227:
Page 228 and 229:
Page 230 and 231:
Page 232 and 233:
Page 234 and 235:
Page 236 and 237:
Page 238 and 239:
Page 240 and 241:
Page 242 and 243:
Page 244 and 245:
Page 246 and 247:
Page 248 and 249:
Page 250 and 251:
Page 252 and 253:
Page 254 and 255:
Page 256 and 257:
Page 258 and 259:
Page 260 and 261:
Page 262 and 263:
Page 264 and 265:
Page 266 and 267:
Page 268 and 269:
Page 270 and 271:
Page 272 and 273:
Page 274 and 275:
Page 276 and 277:
Page 278 and 279:
Page 280 and 281:
Page 282 and 283:
Page 284 and 285:
Page 286 and 287:
Page 288 and 289:
Page 290 and 291:
Page 292 and 293:
Page 294 and 295:
Page 296 and 297:
Page 298 and 299:
Page 300 and 301:
Page 302 and 303:
Page 304 and 305:
Page 306 and 307:
Page 308 and 309:
Page 310 and 311:
Page 312 and 313:
Page 314 and 315:
Page 316 and 317:
Page 318 and 319:
Page 320 and 321:
Page 322 and 323:
Page 324 and 325:
Page 326 and 327:
Page 328 and 329:
Page 330:
show all

Page 1 of 330 The Monthly National Legislation Report 7/5/2010 ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?