New Mexico animal lovers want to see animal abuse registry

Apparently the push by ALDF for animal abuser registries is still on.  These registries are a very bad idea. Learn more about the registries at the SAOVA website.

ALBUQUERQUE (KRQE) – Sex offenders have to register online, now there’s talks in New Mexico of making animal abusers do the same.

It all started with a recent post in a Facebook group for New Mexico animal lovers. The post brought up the idea of an animal abuse registry.

“My initial feeling was it was another resource that will give a voice to the voiceless,” said Krisinda Cheney. Cheney said when she saw the post about an animal abuse registry, she was all for the idea. “In New Mexico, a great deal goes unreported so I think it’s something that holds individuals accountable,” said Cheney.

This isn’t a new idea. Other states have considered the database before and some cities have already implemented it.

“So far this policy has been adopted in multiple jurisdictions in New York State,” said Scott Heiser of the Animal Legal Defense Fund. Heiser said the organization is pushing for a registry in every state.

“It’s a vehicle that prevents those who are placing animals or adoptive animals out into potentially loving homes, a tool to get accurate information when doing background checks,” said Heiser.

At Animal Protection of New Mexico, they said they’re for any initiative that protects animals. However, they said there’s still a lot of barriers to pass the database. “Not the least is figuring out who will run it, who will build it and maintain it, where the money will come from,” said Jessica Johnson of Animal Protection of New Mexico. Johnson also said the person running it has to have access to the right information from law enforcement.

Full article at link:  http://krqe.com/2015/06/22/new-mexico-animal-lovers-want-to-see-animal-abuse-registry/

News Briefs and Updates June 20, 2015

SAOVA Friends,

Decades have gone by without evidence that mandatory spay and neuter (MSN) laws have had any success. Sometimes that is still not enough to deter officials from proposing these failed ordinances. Should MSN be proposed in your area, we have compiled two handouts for your use. “Mandatory Spay Neuter – A Failure Everywhere” along with a collection of national organizations position statements opposing MSN, can be downloaded from our website http://saova.org/download.html

Thank you for reading. Cross Posting is encouraged.

Susan Wolf
Sportsmen's and Animal Owners' Voting Alliance
Working to identify and elect supportive legislators
saova@earthlink.net
http://saova.org

US FISH AND WILDLIFE FINALIZES CHIMP RULE
June 2015. US Fish and Wildlife (FWS) in response to a 2010 petition by HSUS and Jane Goodall announced a final rule to classify all chimpanzees, both wild and captive, as endangered under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). The final rule will go into effect on September 14, 2015. Under the new designation anyone working with captive chimps in the US must apply for a permit from FWS. Organizations that want to continue working with chimpanzees will have to document that the work enhances the survival of the species and benefits chimps in the wild. That could include research that boosts habitat restoration or contributes to improved management. If anyone is actively engaged in chimpanzee research, they must apply for a permit. According to FWS Director Dan Ashe, some biomedical research with chimps may be allowed to continue if it is critical for understanding human disease.

In a press release The National Association for Biomedical Research stated, "The full impact the new FWS ruling will have on biomedical research is unclear. However, it would be unfortunate, even grave, should an infectious disease outbreak occur where human lives are at stake and a chimpanzee model could expedite development of life-saving medicines." Read the full press release at NABR: http://tinyurl.com/phe9zya

ALDF LOSES COURT BATTLE AGAINST SEAQUARIUM
The Orca Network, Animal Legal Defense Fund and others failed in their challenge against the Miami Seaquarium 's federal license renewal for the orca known as Lolita. "Only Congress, not this court, possesses the power to limit the agency's discretion and demand annual, substantive compliance with animal welfare standards," Judge Susan Black wrote for a three-judge panel for the 11th Circuit Court.

Every year, Seaquarium must renew its Animal Welfare Act (AWA) license with the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). Before the expiration of its license in 2012, the ALDF sent a letter to the USDA asserting that Lolita's living conditions are inhumane, and Seaquarium's license should not be renewed. The USDA responded that it found Seaquarium in "compliance with the regulations and standards," and renewed the facility's license to keep and exhibit Lolita. It did not conduct an inspection of Lolita's living conditions based on the allegations in ALDF's letter. The ALDF sued in Miami, seeking a court order to set aside the USDA's renewal of Seaquarium's license, based on the theory that AWA animal welfare inspection laws should apply both to new licensees and license renewals.

In granting USDA summary judgment, the lower court found that the USDA complied with its license-renewal process, which requires just a certification of compliance, payment of an annual fee, and submission of an annual report detailing the number of animals exhibited in the prior year. Full story at Courthouse News Service: http://tinyurl.com/ppaqjj2

ALDF SUIT AGAINST PA DEPT OF AG MOVES FORWARD
The Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania allowed a lawsuit filed last summer by ALDF to move forward against the Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture. According to their press release, ALDF sued the Department for passing watered down regulations that gutted Pennsylvania’s historic Dog Law. ALDF and Petitioners asserted that the Department was not authorized to exempt nursing mothers from the statutory ban on metal strand flooring and from the statutory requirement of unfettered access to exercise areas. Petitioners requested that the court enjoin the Department from enforcing above regulations currently in 7 Pa.Code 28a.8 and 28b.1, declaring these sections to be in conflict with the Dog Law and therefore unlawful, and order the Department to revise the regulations in a manner consistent with the Dog Law.

Petitioners stated that the Dog Law prohibits Class C license holders (Commercial Kennels) from using metal strand wiring in the primary enclosure of adult dogs and requires unfettered access to an exercise area. Department regulations provide for compliance if only 50% of primary enclosure flooring meets that regulation, and allow a commercial kennel owner to be in compliance if a nursing mother is provided with daily access to an exercise area.

Judge Bonnie Brigance Leadbetter overruled the Department’s preliminary objection to Petitioners’ standing. In her opinion Judge Leadbetter noted that before filing the suit Petitioners requested both the Department and the Independent Regulatory Review Commission (IRRC) review the regulations. Both the Department and the IRRC declined. Judge Leadbetter wrote, “These allegations, if proven, strongly suggest that redress through other channels is futile and thus that judicial scrutiny is required to insure that the regulations adopted by the Department conform to the law under which they were promulgated.” Opinion by Judge Leadbetter http://tinyurl.com/phxndwg

PALM BEACH COUNTY CALLS FOR END TO IMPORTING DOGS, CATS
Palm Beach County's unwanted dogs and cats are more likely to die if rescue groups keep importing animals from other counties and states, local officials warned. The county's animal shelter near West Palm Beach takes in 15,000 dogs and cats a year that are at risk of being euthanized if they aren't adopted. Finding homes for local shelter animals is made harder by well-meaning rescue groups continuing to have unwanted dogs and cats trucked and flown into Palm Beach County for adoption events, according to county officials. Some imported dogs and cats are coming from as close as Broward and Miami-Dade counties while others come from Alabama, Tennessee and even farther.

Because many rescue groups have ignored the county's request that they stop bringing in outside dogs and cats for adoption, County Mayor Shelley Vana went public with a plea to focus on helping local animals. The press conference was prompted by another local rescue group bringing in 60 dogs from outside the county for an adoption event.

"How does flying or busing in puppies from other regions help the dogs in this community?" Vana asked at a press conference from the county shelter. Vana continued, “What message is being sent to would-be adopters? What happens to those at-risk at animal care and control when those animals are flown in? The truth is often uncomfortable. Importing puppies and dogs into Palm Beach County while dogs in our own shelter die, means that some groups are simply stocking their shelves with dogs that are highly adoptable at a high fee.”

The county wants rescue groups to at least temporarily stop bringing in outside animals until the county shelter reaches a 90 percent “save rate”. So far this year, the county has an 80 percent "save rate" for dogs, while that drops to just a 39 percent for cats. Source: Sun-Sentinel

New Agency Rules Published August 2014

SAOVA friends,

Two new agency rules are now in effect.  It is important for you to review the rules and determine any potential impact on your breeding program or business.
 

The rule currently gathering the most publicity is the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) regulation for importing young dogs.  HSUS CEO Wayne Pacelle is boasting that this rule is a blow against puppy mills abroad.  It is not surprising that he would work this to his advantage for publicity without mentioning the same rule also impacts rescue imports.  The new rule will slow the importation of foreign strays and street dogs for resale in U.S. shelters.
 

We find it interesting that after Congress directed this import rule in 2008 APHIS spent six years finalizing it.  In 2006 Congress enacted the PETS Act which directed State and local emergency preparedness plans to include household pets and service animals. In response, APHIS initiated a rule making process for licensed entities to also develop emergency contingency plans.  APHIS issued a final rule December 2012; however in July 2013 USDA issued a stay of the Animal Welfare Act Contingency Plan Regulation.  Moving forward to 2012, HSUS submitted a petition to APHIS requesting revision of the retail pet rule to include licensing small breeders inside their homes and all sight-unseen sales.  APHIS managed to accomplish the entire rule making process between May 2012 and September 2013.  
 

Thanks for reading. Cross posting is encouraged.

 Susan Wolf

Sportsmen's & Animal Owners' Voting Alliance

 

IMPORTATION OF LIVE DOGS, Docket No. APHIS-2009-0053
 

Monday, August 18, 2014 Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) issued a final rule for Importation of Live Dogs which goes into effect November 17, 2014.   In the 2008 Farm Bill Congress added a section to the Animal Welfare Act (AWA) which would restrict the importation of certain live dogs.  APHIS began the rule making process in September 2011 and received over 74,000 comments. 
 

The rule prohibits the importation of dogs, with limited exceptions, from any part of the world into the continental United States or Hawaii for purposes of resale, research, or veterinary treatment, unless the dogs are in good health, have received all necessary vaccinations, and are at least 6 months of age.
 

The term ‘‘resale’’ includes, but is not limited to, any transfer of ownership or control of imported dogs to another person, for more than de minimis consideration.  The term de minimis has the standard dictionary meaning, which, according to Merriam-Webster, is “lacking significance or importance; so minor as to merit disregard.”  The term ‘‘consideration’’ has the standard dictionary meaning, which is defined by Merriam-Webster as ‘‘the inducement to a contract or other legal transaction; specifically:  an act or forbearance or the promise thereof done or given by one party in return for the act or promise of another.”  The rule does not consider an “adoption fee” to be de minimis consideration and therefore there is no exemption for dogs rescued in other countries and brought to the U.S. for resale.
 

This rule does not apply when there is no transfer of ownership or control of a dog to another person after the dog’s importation into the United States. Therefore, dogs imported by a person who will use the dog as a personal pet, for sport, for shows or competitions, breeding or for training as working dogs do not fall under this rule.
 

Under this rule, dogs may be imported for veterinary treatment without meeting all of the age, health, and vaccination requirements only if a licensed veterinarian in the country of export certifies that the dog is in need of veterinary treatment that cannot be obtained in the country of export.
 

Dogs imported for use in research, tests, or experiments at a research facility are exempt provided that satisfactory evidence has been submitted to APHIS along with import permit application.
 

RULE REQUIREMENTS
Dogs must be accompanied by an import permit issued by APHIS and imported into the continental United States or Hawaii within 30 days after the proposed date of arrival stated in the import permit.
 

Each dog must be accompanied by an original health certificate issued in English by a licensed veterinarian with a valid license to practice veterinary medicine in the country of export stating that the dog is at least 6 months of age and has been vaccinated in the past 12 months for distemper, hepatitis, leptospirosis, parvovirus, and parainfluenza virus at a frequency that provides  continuous protection of the dog from those diseases and is in accordance with currently accepted practices as cited in veterinary medicine reference guides.  The health certificate must also state that the dog is free of infectious disease that would endanger the dog or public health. Each dog must also be accompanied by a valid rabies vaccination certificate.
 

Any dog may be refused entry for noncompliance with the requirements of the rule or may be seized and the person intending to import the dog will be required to provide care at his or her expense. The AWA provides for both criminal and civil penalties for violations, including civil penalties of up to $10,000 for each violation. Any person who violates the regulations will be subject to these penalties.
 

All dogs imported into the U.S. may be subject to other laws and regulations. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) also has requirements for imported dogs that must be met.
 

The complete rule may be viewed at the Federal Register: http://tinyurl.com/nsd7zf2

 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ANIMAL INCIDENT REPORTING, Docket DOT–OST–2010–0211

The Department of Transportation (USDOT) issued a final rule to amend the requirement for air carriers to report incidents involving the loss, injury, or death of an animal during air transport. The final rule will expand the reporting requirement to U.S. carriers that operate scheduled service with at least one aircraft with a design capacity of more than 60 seats. The rule also expands the definition of animal to include all cats and dogs transported by covered carriers, regardless of whether the cat or dog is transported as a pet by its owner or as part of a commercial shipment shipped by a breeder, trainer, or handler. This rule goes into effect January 1, 2015.

Carrier reports will include carrier and flight number; date; time; description of the animal; name and contact information of owner, representative, or shipper of the animal; and a narrative of the incident and action taken.  Carriers must file monthly and annual reports and report “0” if there were no reportable incidents.
 

In August 2010, the Department received a petition for rulemaking from the Animal Legal Defense Fund (ALDF) requesting the reporting of loss, injury, or death of animals in air transport be revised to require airlines to report any such incident involving any animal they carry.  ALDF maintained that whether an animal is shipped as a pet or as an item of commerce has no bearing on its ability to suffer.
 

HSUS, ASPCA, Humane Society Veterinary Medical Association (HSVMA), Animal Welfare Institute, and other animal rights groups requested the airlines account for incidents involving all species of animals regardless of intended use.  Senator Richard Durbin and former Senators Bob Menendez and Joe Lieberman supported the ALDF petition and requested that the Department consider pursuing a comprehensive study on what animals are traveling in plane cargo holds and how the Department could further expand the definition of "animal" without placing undue burden on air carriers.
 

USDOT received 5,414 comments including airlines, six animal rights organizations, The Association of Zoos and Aquariums (AZA) and the National Association for Biomedical Research (NABR). USDOT also received 5,403individual comments. While the individual comments also urged expanding the definition of animal to all species, the majority appeared to be form letters from members of the animal rights advocacy groups.
 

Airlines for America (A4A) opposed expanding the definition of animal on the basis that doing so would conflict with Congressional intent that the term animal in the original regulations meant pets.

AZA also commented that the Congressional intent of the underlying authorizing legislation was to focus on the loss, injury or death of family pets and that the proposed rule could not effectively and efficiently be applied to the entire animal kingdom.  AZA further noted that if the definition of animal were expanded to include all species, it is conceivable that the burden placed upon the airlines could effectively force air carriers to completely discontinue the transport of all animals. This would create catastrophic consequences for the AZA zoo and aquarium community and the sustainability of the animal collections in their care.
 

USDOT declined to expand the definition of animal to cover all species of animals stating, “We believe it would be unduly burdensome to require covered carriers to report the death, loss, or injury of all species of animals because there potentially could be thousands of individual animals such as fish, rodents, and insects that are transported by air carriers in a single commercial shipment.”
 

The complete rule may be viewed at the Federal Register http://tinyurl.com/phvs3gz

 

 

Legislation Briefs and Updates June 23, 2014

SAOVA Friends,

Our volunteers are already busy following primary elections and monitoring HSUS/HSLF political contributions.  To date contributions to Democrat federal candidates is $92,000 and to Republicans $45,000.  Top Senate recipients are Mary Landrieu (D, LA) with $8,000 followed by Senators Kelly Ayotte (R, NH); Thad Cochran (R, MS); Susan Collins (R, ME); and Jack Reed (D, RI) with $3,000.  Top recipients among House Members are Jeff Denham (R, CA) with $5,000; Michael Fitzpatrick (R, PA) with $4,000; Earl Blumenhauer (D, OR) with $3,500; and Julia Brownley (D, CA), Peter DeFazio (D, OR), Jim Gerlach (R, PA), Peter Roskam (R, IL), and Kurt Schrader (D, OR) with $3,000.  Planning ahead, HSLF contributed $5,000 to the Mikulski for Senate Committee for the 2016 primary.

Notable listing among HSLF independent expenditures is $41,799 supporting the Congressional campaign of Tony Strickland (R, CA).

Who funds HSLF? Many donors are from within the HSUS or from related organizations.  Largest donors to date are Carole Baskin (Big Cat Rescue) $10,000; Eric Bernthal, Esq (HSUS Chair of the Board) $10,000;  Jeanne and Ed Daniels (animal rights activists) $10,000; Mary Max (HSUS Board of Directors) $10,000; Marian Probst (Fund for Animals) $10,000; Jason Weiss  (HSUS Board of Directors) and Donna Weiss $10,000;  Peggy Kaplan (HSUS National Council Chair); Richard Kaplan $10,000; and Arthur Benjamin (HSUS National Council) $5,000.

The world not only belongs to those who show up, it's controlled by the best informed and most motivated.

Thanks for reading.  Cross posting is encouraged.

Susan Wolf
Sportsmen's & Animal Owners' Voting Alliance
Working to Identify and Elect Supportive Legislators

JUDGE DENIES IDAHO DAIRYMEN REQUEST TO JOIN SUIT
U.S. District Judge B. Lynn Winmill denied the IDA’s motion to join the suit. “The state and the IDA’s goals in this proceeding are identical, and the State can adequately represent those interests,” Winmill wrote. The law’s supporters say it protects the private-property rights of agricultural operators and shields them from having their businesses attacked unfairly by activists. Idaho is the seventh state to adopt these provisions to their agriculture protection laws which include prohibitions on falsifying employment applications.  Seventeen plaintiffs, including ALDF, PETA, ACLU, CFS, Farm Sanctuary, Farm Forward, Sandpoint Vegetarians, Western Watersheds Project, and journalist Will Potter filed suit against the law in March.

MILITARY GEAR TO COMBAT FERAL HOGS
CHICAGO, Ill. (Reuters) — The U.S. Department of Agriculture is gearing up with thermal imaging weapons to combat feral hogs. Department officials say they cause about $1.5 billion dollars of damage every year to farm communities and fields.  Now there are worries they may help spread a deadly pig virus as well.  As a result, the USDA wants to buy thermal scopes that snap onto high-powered rifles and will allow APHIS to make night time attacks on herds.  The thermal scopes are part of a $20 million nationwide project to combat the feral swine, which have gobbled down apples in New York, cleaned out cornfields in North Carolina and devoured calves in Mississippi.   Source:  Western Producer http://tinyurl.com/pkhcrmn

HUNTING ON PUBLIC LANDS AT RISK
HSUS has petitioned the Department of the Interior to ban the use of lead ammunition when discharging a firearm on federal lands. The petition, signed by the HSUS, the Fund for Animals, Defenders of Wildlife, the Natural Resources Defense Council, the Wildlife Conservation Society, and others, asks that the federal government mandate the use of non-lead ammunition for the taking of all species in areas managed by the National Park Service and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. This would put one-fifth of the total land area of the United States off limits to hunters with traditional ammunition.

Last year HSUS successfully lobbied the California legislature to ban the use of lead ammunition.

CALL YOUR OFFICIALS TODAY:
Call Interior Secretary Sally Jewell today at 202-208-3181 and tell her to reject this scientifically baseless petition from HSUS to ban traditional ammunition. Let the Department of the Interior know that requiring the use of alternative, non-lead ammunition, is nothing more than a back-door way to ban hunting by raising the price of participating in an American sporting tradition.

- There is no sound science to support banning traditional ammunition used by hunters for centuries.
- There is absolutely no adverse wildlife population impact that warrants such a drastic measure.
- There is no evidence that consuming game taken with traditional ammunition poses a human health to hunters and their family.

WILD HORSE DEBATE
June 22, 2014.  Friends of Animals and the Cloud Foundation petitioned the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to list wild horses as threatened or endangered, which would trigger protections for herds in 10 Western states. The groups contend wild horses on the public range face extinction because of loss of habitat to cattle grazing, mining, energy exploration and urban expansion. The groups also blame BLM’s controls, which limit the horses to small herds on isolated ranges, require frequent roundups and are headed toward sterilization of horses. See petition

Robert Garrott, a Montana State University wildlife biologist who served on the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) research panel that spent two years studying the wild horse issue, disagrees. Today’s wild horses are “entirely different” from those that evolved in North America, says Garrott, director of fish and wildlife ecology at Montana State. Garrott sees the petition as a move to try to stop all horse population management by the BLM, and to remove livestock from the range to accommodate more horses.

The Bureau of Land Management says that as of March, there were 49,209 wild horses and burros on western ranges, 22,500 more than its management objectives allow, given the need for ecological balance with other species and uses.  Source: Salt Lake Tribune

PETITION TO REINTRODUCE GRIZZLY BEARS IN SOUTHWEST
The Center for Biological Diversity petitioned the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to work to return grizzly bears to the Grand Canyon, the Gila/Mogollon complex and other areas of the Southwest. See petition.   The petition cited 110,000 square miles of potential bear habitat – in Arizona, New Mexico, the Sierra Nevada in California and Utah’s Uinta Mountains – that could allow the introduction of up to 4,000 grizzly bears in the West. Arizona Cattle Growers’ Association stated that reintroducing bears to Arizona would hurt the livestock industry, especially for ranchers near the Arizona and New Mexico border.  Source: Tucson Sentinel

ALDF ENLISTS CONGRESS IN ORCA WARS
Two years ago ALDF and PETA filed suit against USDA challenging their decision to renew Miami Seaquarium’s federal license.  Last year ALDF filed a complaint with OSHA claiming Miami Seaquarium is guilty of blatant violations of the Occupational Safety and Health Act.  ALDF also lobbied for California’s AB 2140 which would have banned the use of captive orcas for performance or entertainment or for breeding.

Now ALDF has carried the orca wars to Congress.  This month 38 members of Congress signed a letter to Tom Vilsack, U.S. Secretary of Agriculture, demanding updated regulations for captive marine mammals.  The letter notes that the release of the documentary film “Blackfish” calls into question the feasibility of humanely keeping orcas in captivity.  The letter urges USDA to publish the 2002 advanced notice of proposed rulemaking for captive marine mammals, allow public comment, and quickly finalize a the rule.  The letter is signed by Jared Huffman (D, CA); Adam Schiff (D, CA); Peter DeFazio (D, OR); Louise Slaughter (D, NY); Barbara Lee (D, CA); and Jim Moran (D, VA) among others.   Representatives Schiff and Huffman, who believe the American people want to see these regulations, added an amendment to the Agriculture Appropriations Act that will provide one million dollars to study the effects of captivity on orcas.

Legislation Briefs January 15, 2014

SAOVA Friends,

Another year is beginning and promises to see ever increasing pressure and legislative action by animal activist groups.   HSUS sent a missive this month announcing they had big plans for the year ahead and listed some of their top priorities for 2014.  Their list included:

1. Passing legislation in all 50 states to set so-called “humane” breeding standards;
2. Banning use of lead ammo for hunting;
3. Fighting the King amendment which would prevent states like California from imposing their own animal welfare standards on farm goods brought in from other states;
4. Stopping (ag-gag) bills that prohibit unauthorized video-taping or delayed cruelty reporting;
5. Securing a ballot initiative to end wolf hunting in Michigan; and a ballot initiative in Maine to ban bear hunting over bait and with hounds.

Remain alert for activist legislation introduced in your area. SAOVA monitors a limited number of bills on our website. Working together we can protect our traditions, avocations and livelihoods from anti-hunting and anti-animal breeding radicals.  The world not only belongs to those who show up, it's controlled by the best informed and most motivated.

Thanks for reading.  Cross posting is encouraged.

Susan Wolf
Sportsmen's & Animal Owners' Voting Alliance
Working to Identify and Elect Supportive Legislators
saova@earthlink.net
Like us on Facebook

PETITION TO PROMULGATE STANDARDS FOR BEARS
APHIS received a petition from PETA requesting an amendment to the Animal Welfare Act regulations to add specific standards for the humane handling, care, treatment, and transportation of all species of bears held in captivity except polar bears, for which there are already standards. The petition states that the generic standards in subpart F of 9 CFR Part 3 are inadequate and do not address the complex and unique behavioral, dietary, and physiological needs of bears. APHIS is soliciting comments on a list of questions, such as requirements for environmental enrichment and prohibition of public contact, which are posted in the Proposed Rule Docket.  Comments may be mailed to: to Docket No. APHIS-2012-0106, Regulatory Analysis and Development, PPD, APHIS, Station 3A-03.8, 4700 River Road Unit 118, Riverdale, MD 20737-1238 or submitted on line http://tinyurl.com/mklfc2o  Comment period closes January 27 2014 at 11:59 PM ET.

APHIS PET RULE UPDATES
APHIS created a new, online form in December for the public to submit their concerns about animals that are covered under the Animal Welfare Act (AWA), submit complaints against pet breeders, and report pet breeders they think should be licensed.  Anonymous complaints are accepted and all complaints are investigated.

On December 16 Associated Dog Clubs of New York State (ADCNYS), an AKC Federation of Dog Clubs with 56 member clubs in New York State, filed a lawsuit in the Federal District Court in Washington DC. The lawsuit asks the Court to declare that the Retail Pet Store Rule is “arbitrary, capricious and inconsistent" with law, and to remand the Rule back to the USDA. The lawsuit also seeks an injunction that would bar the USDA from enforcing the Retail Pet Store Rule. The complaint in the lawsuit was filed on behalf of 42 Plaintiffs that consisted of dog and cat clubs, associations and a registry representing approximately 19,000 breeders who potentially would be adversely affected by the Rule. Those 42 Plaintiffs represent less than 1% of the more than 5,500 Dog and Cat Clubs in the U.S., which supports the assertion that the Rule potentially affects far more than the 4,640 breeders that APHIS stated was the maximum number of breeders who potentially would be affected by the Rule.  One of the cornerstone assertions in the complaint is the fact that APHIS failed to document how it arrived at its figure of 4,640 breeders, which figure is exponentially below the number of hobby breeders who potentially could be affect by the Rule. The complaint is posted and can be viewed here: http://tinyurl.com/mqltngb

On December 30, 2013, HSUS formally filed a Motion to Intervene in the case, and its Motion and accompanying exhibits totaled over 100 pages. The HSUS complaint can be viewed here: http://tinyurl.com/p5jb4d7  In the motion, HSUS states, "The Final Rule is the culmination of years of effort on the part of The HSUS to bring about meaningful change to existing law. If Plaintiffs are successful in their efforts to set aside the Final Rule, The HSUS will suffer immediate and concrete harm."

On January 7 HSUS posted notice of a complaint filed with USDA requesting that the agency take enforcement action against more than 50 commercial dog breeders who appear to be operating in violation of federal law. The breeders appear to have illegally sold puppies to middleman Purebred Breeders, LLC, without a USDA license. The complaint filed by HSUS also urges the USDA to take enforcement action against Purebred Breeders for failing to obtain a license in light of recent changes to federal regulations that require retailers who sell puppies to consumers sight-unseen to obtain a federal license.  HSUS is wasting no time reporting breeders even though APHIS has not had time to answer all questions or issue new licenses.

On January 13 the Justice Department filed a response to the HSUS Motion to Intervene stating, "Defendants take no position regarding the Motion to Intervene of the Humane Society of the United States."  Also on January 13, ADCYNS filed a Response to the HSUS Motion to Intervene as a Defendant in the Lawsuit.  The ADCYNS response is posted at http://www.keepourdomesticanimals.com/


ALDF WATCH
Animal Legal Defense Fund (ALDF) posts that they reviewed inspection records of commercial breeders in the state of New Jersey and singled out what they have determined are the worst breeders.  ALDF then sent a formal letter this week to the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) demanding the agency enforce the law against violations of the Animal Welfare Act (AWA).  In the letter ALDF urged APHIS to move the animals to reputable shelters where they can receive veterinary attention, apply civil penalties, and revoke the licenses of the commercial dealers that have violated the AWA on multiple occasions. ALDF announced a similar review of inspection reports from licensed dealers in Nebraska, claiming their review shows that animal cruelty routinely goes unpunished. “We call upon the USDA to act now on these ongoing violations, which have been thoroughly documented in their own records,” posted Stephen Wells, executive director of ALDF.  Source: ALDF website

SAVE NEW YORK CARRIAGE HORSES
The horse-drawn carriage business is an iconic part of New York City, employing hundreds of dedicated, hard-working men and women, caring for well-bred, well-trained horses and attracting tourists to New York City. Newly elected Mayor Bill de Blasio said that one of his first acts after taking office will be to ban horse-drawn carriages in Central Park.  His plan is to replace the historic horse-drawn carriages with electric cars and redevelop the prime real estate that currently accommodates the stables. Supporting de Blasio’s mission to ban carriage horses is the ASPCA who told press, “The ASPCA believes that the use of carriage horses in 21st-century New York City is unnatural, unnecessary and an undeniable strain on the horses’ quality of life.”

The ban would end jobs for the 300 carriage drivers and force owners to retire their horses.  Steve Malone, spokesman for the Horse and Carriage Association of New York, told reporters “It’s unconstitutional to take my private property unless I’ve done something wrong.”

NY State Horse Council Statement of Support is posted below. Letters in support of the carriage industry are urgently needed.  Send your letters to:

Stephen Malone, President
Horse & Carriage Association of New York
618 West 52nd Street, New York NY 10019
malonecarriages@aol.com

NEW YORK STATE HORSE COUNCIL STATEMENT OF SUPPORT
FOR THE NEW YORK CITY CARRIAGE HORSE/CARRIAGE HORSE INDUSTRY
It is not a question of whether the carriage trade is necessary to New York City or not. The carriage horses are an iconic symbol of NYC; they are part of the cultural heritage not only of NYC but also of America. They provide economic benefits to the City through tourism and tax revenues. Today’s carriage horses provide a presence and exposure to rural animals not available to many anywhere else.

Some people have labelled the carriage horse industry as “inhumane.” It is not. While the word “inhumane” is not mentioned in the law, cruelty is. NYS Agriculture & Markets Law, Article 26 and more specifically, Section 353, defines cruelty as “failure to provide proper sustenance, such as food, water, shelter and veterinary care.

All the NYC carriage horses are well taken care of and have better than average stabling available to them. Each horse is provided food and water (each carriage carries food and water for the horses so they may eat/drink during working hours); the stables are warm, well-ventilated and have spacious stalls for resting during non-working hours; veterinary care is required and provided annually and on-call; each horse also has a mandatory 5 week vacation break. The NYC carriage horses are probably the most regulated horses in the country, if not the world. They are covered by approximately 144 pages of regulations; they are watched over very closely by several organizations, including the ASPCA.

It is the opinion of the Board of Directors of the New York State Horse Council that the NYC carriage horses and their owners should be allowed to continue to operate their small businesses without fear of reprisal or loss of livelihood. The horses are a great tourist attraction because they ARE horses - not cold, impersonal pieces of metal.

The NYS Horse Council calls on all other State Horse Councils and all concerned horse groups and horsepersons throughout the country to come to the support of the New York City carriage horses and the carriage industry. The world is watching what happens here; the outcome could affect YOU!
Marsha S. Himler, President, NYS Horse Council

Legislation Briefs November 3, 2013

SAOVA Friends,

The final pet seller rule goes into effect on November 18, 2013. This rule would extend APHIS authority to include large segments of the retail pet trade as regulated under the Animal Welfare Act (AWA), including pet species as dogs, cats, guinea pigs, rabbits, and hamsters, among others. The overarching intent of the revision is to regulate sight unseen retail pet sales, which, without proof, APHIS claims have dramatically increased as a result of growing Internet usage.   APHIS also claims the rule closes a so-called “Internet loophole” and restores the original intent of Congress for administration of the AWA.

We have always believed the issue of how Congress intended the AWA to be enforced was decided by the Circuit Court in Doris Day Animal League (DDAL) v. Ann M. Veneman (Secretary, USDA). We agree with the Court’s decision and do not think that several decades ago, Congress ever meant USDA to enforce the AWA inside people’s homes.  However, now that the current APHIS administration has elected to make a determination granting themselves additional authority of such magnitude, we believe Congress is obligated to review this issue, and should do so as quickly as possible.  

Download full article at http://saova.org/APHIS_authority.html

Thanks for reading.  Cross posting is encouraged.

Susan Wolf
Sportsmen's & Animal Owners' Voting Alliance
Working to Identify and Elect Supportive Legislators
saova@earthlink.net

APHIS PET RULE LICENSING WEBINARS
USDA Animal Care will host a series of Retail Pet Store Rule webinars in November and December. Webinars will be held Thursdays from 2 p.m. to 3 p.m. EST for a four-week period. http://tinyurl.com/kgk4c3p  The schedule of topics for the webinars is as follows:
November 7 – Am I regulated under USDA’s Retail Pet Store Rule
November 14 – How will USDA implement the Retail Pet Store Rule  
November 21 – What is USDA’s inspection process in a home
December 5 – How will USDA enforce the Retail Pet Store Rule

FDA DECISION ON LABELING REQUIREMENTS FOR EGGS
Docket ID: FDA-2006-P-0338. September 22, 2013 FDA posted Denial of petition to revise requirements http://tinyurl.com/k7rxvey
Compassion Over Killing and Animal Legal Defense Fund and Penn Law Animal Law Project Petition, University of PA Law School, filed a citizens petition September 21, 2010 requesting new labeling of shell eggs sold in the U.S.  Petitioners claim that current labeling fails to reveal to consumers certain material facts that substantially influence their purchasing decisions.  Petitioners further requested that FDA require shell eggs to bear one of three labels: Free Range Eggs, Cage Free Eggs, Eggs From Caged Hens and provided descriptions of production conditions that would be associated with each term.

The agency states in its decision summary, “After careful review of your citizen petition and for the reasons described below, FDA is denying your citizen petition in accordance with 21 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 10.30(e)(3) because you do not provide a sufficient basis for the agency to revise the current labeling requirements for shell eggs. Specifically, you have not provided evidence sufficient to show that eggs from caged hens are “nutritionally inferior” to eggs from free-range and cage-free hens. Therefore, nutritional properties cannot provide a basis to consider the method of production for eggs to be a material fact.  Moreover, nutritional information regarding particular eggs is conveyed to consumers directly by placing the particular nutrient information on the label, not by identifying the method of production, which does not provide consumers with information as to nutritive content. Second, you have not provided sufficient evidence to show that eggs from caged hens have a greater risk of Salmonella contamination than eggs from the other two production methods you define; consequently, the risk of Salmonella cannot provide a basis to consider the method of production for eggs to be a material fact.  Finally, even assuming the method of egg production may be of interest to some consumers, consumer interest alone is not a material fact. Therefore, FDA is not compelled under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (“the Act”) or it’s implementing regulations to require such labeling under the law. Finally, even if the agency could require such labeling, it would choose to use its limited resources on rulemakings of higher priority, such as those that are of greatest public health significance or are statutorily-mandated.

PROHIBIT PUBLIC CONTACT WITH BIG CATS, BEARS, AND NONHUMAN PRIMATES
Docket No. APHIS-2012-0107. In August 2013, HSUS, World Wildlife Fund, Animal Legal Defense Fund (ALDF), Big Cat Rescue, and others petitioned APHIS to amend sections of the AWA. Petitioners requested regulation changes in part 2.131 to explicitly prohibit licensed exhibitors from allowing persons, with some exceptions, from coming into direct physical contact with any big cats, bears, and nonhuman primates of any age. The petition states that the current handling regulations in 9 CFR part 2 allow licensees the opportunity to engage in animal exhibition practices via interactive public contact sessions and photographic opportunities, and that these activities not only place these animals at risk of harm but threaten public safety.  Petitioners also suggested revisions to 9 CFR part 3 to ensure that the sections containing specific standards for the handling of nonhuman primates are consistent with the regulatory changes they propose in § 2.131.  Nonhuman primates include lemurs which are a popular exhibit at many petting zoos.

APHIS issued an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM) requesting comments on conditions where public contact could be allowed; whether exhibitors and dealers should be required to keep additional records and identify their animals with microchips or retinal scans, etc.  The comment period has been extended to November 18, 2013.  Comment at Federal Register: http://tinyurl.com/ln76cs3
The majority of comments at this time are form letters from the HSUS website supporting a rule.

JUDGE CLEARS WAY FOR DOMESTIC HORSE SLAUGHTER
Judge’s Ruling Favors USDA Providing Horse Slaughter Inspections by Dan Flynn, November 1, 2013
USDA is not required to conduct an Environmental impact Statement or Environmental Assessment in order to grant equine inspection services to businesses planning to pack horsemeat for export, U.S. District Court Judge Christina Armijo ruled Friday. The judge denied the request by animal groups for a permanent injunction and dismissed the case challenging USDA’s authority.  The decision is a massive loss for the Humane Society of the U.S., which largely funded the lawsuit and enlisted 15 other groups and individuals to join it as plaintiffs.

And it was a defining victory for the Department of Justice attorneys who re-affirmed USDA powers contained in the Federal Meat Inspection Act that go back more than 100 years.   It means horse slaughter for human consumption could resume shortly under USDA inspection for the first time since 2006. “Valley Meat Company, LLC and Rains Natural Meats are both very pleased with the decision of Judge Armijo, said Albuquerque  attorney A. Blair Dunn.  “This is a very well-reasoned and thorough opinion.  Valley and Rains are very grateful for the hard work and thought that Judge Armijo put into this decision.  Both companies will now focus on final preparations to open and begin work.”  Full story at link: http://tinyurl.com/mredlmd

CONGRESSIONAL SPORTSMEN'S CAUCUS BIPARTISAN LEADERSHIP
PUSHES TO RESTORE SEQUESTERED SPORTSMEN TRUST FUNDS
For Immediate Release. November 1, 2013 (Washington, DC). In an effort to exempt vital sportsmen trust funds from budget sequestration, the bipartisan Senate leadership of the Congressional Sportsmen's Caucus (CSC) sent a letter to Sylvia Burwell, Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), requesting that the $50 million sequestered from the Wildlife Restoration, Sport Fish Restoration and Boating Safety Trust Funds in 2013 be returned to the states.

In bipartisan fashion, CSC Senate Co-Chairs, Kay Hagan and John Thune, and Senate Vice-Chairs, Mark Pryor and James Risch, signed on to the letter, requesting the OMB release the sequestered sportsmen trust funds that are derived from excise taxes levied on guns and ammunition; fishing tackle and equipment; motorboat fuel; and bows and arrows. The trust funds are the foundation of the unique American System of Conservation Funding, a "user pays-public benefits" program. This user-pays funding strategy has produced numerous public benefits including: abundant fish and wildlife populations, access to public lands and clean waters, improved fish and wildlife habitat, improved soil and water conservation, shooting ranges, and boating access facilities.

Jeff Crane, President of the Congressional Sportsmen's Foundation (CSF) praised the Senate CSC leadership for their continued bipartisan support. "We salute the bipartisan leadership of the Congressional Sportsmen's Caucus for once again standing up in support of hunters and anglers. These dedicated trust funds form the financial backbone of the most successful conservation story in history, and to release them back to the state wildlife agencies where they belong is simply the right thing to do."

"North Carolina and states across the country depend on this funding to restore and manage fisheries and wildlife habitats, open and maintain recreational access, and provide hunting and boating safety education. Moreover, applying sequestration to the trust funds represents a breach in trust between sportsmen and women and industries that pay an excise tax to specifically fund projects that enhance outdoor recreation activities and opportunities," Senator Hagan stated.

By withholding $50 million from Wildlife Restoration, Sport Fish Restoration, and Boating Safety programs, the Budget Control Act of 2011 will adversely affect states' ability to manage their fish and wildlife resources; open and maintain recreational access; and deliver hunter and boating safety education.

In the letter, CSC leadership noted that in implementing sequestration, OMB is required to follow rules outlined in the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985. The act provides that budgetary resources sequestered in trust fund accounts in a fiscal year "shall be available in subsequent years to the extent otherwise provided in law."

In March, CSF, along with 44 organizations representing millions of hunters, anglers and other conservationists, sent a letter to House and Senate leadership requesting assistance in exempting the Wildlife and Sport Fish Restoration and Boating Safety Trust Funds from the Budget Sequestration Act of 2011.  http://tinyurl.com/lvz9mal
CONTACT: Cole Henry  cole@sportsmenslink.org

Legislation Briefs June 5, 2013

Dear SAOVA Friends,

The IRS scandal continues to unfold in Washington with Congressional hearings underway and now investigation by the FBI into IRS actions and targeting of certain nonprofits. Discovery that the Director of the IRS division implicated in using the improper targeting, Lois Lerner, is an active member of HSUS raised questions whether she used her position to run interference for HSUS.

Rep. Blaine Luetkemeyer (R-MO) wrote a letter to Lerner the year before asking that HSUS’s political spending be scrutinized. Lerner took no action. In response, Rep. Luetkemeyer wrote another letter to the Treasury Secretary and the Inspector General for Tax Administration renewing his call for an investigation of HSUS.

In his weekly column, Luetkemeyer writes, “Three years ago, a number of constituents brought to my attention their concerns that the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) was involved in political and lobbying activities that were in direct violation of its 501(c)3 tax-except status that prohibits such activities. To be clear, HSUS is not affiliated with your local animal shelter. In fact, only 1 percent of the money HSUS raises makes its way to animal shelters at all. Instead, it spends millions of dollars on lobbying, ballot initiatives, and other political activities.  For three years, and after providing the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) with more than 3,000 pages of documents exposing HSUS’ activities and calling for an investigation, the agency told me they could not discuss ongoing investigations and were also unable to confirm or deny whether or not an investigation was underway.”

Luetkemeyer continues, “This is the worst kind of government abuse that I have ever encountered in my more than two decades in public service and I am determined to get to the bottom of things on behalf of those folks who came to me three years ago with these allegations.”  http://luetkemeyer.house.gov

Please write to your own Congressman and ask why the IRS has ignored the repeated requests of Congressman Luetkemeyer to act upon the allegations that the HSUS was involved in political and lobbying activities that were in direct violation of its 501(c)3 tax-except status that prohibits such activities. A thorough investigation is needed to resolve this issue and to restore the faith and trust in our government.

The world not only belongs to those who show up, it's controlled by the best informed and most motivated.  Thanks for reading.

Cross posting is encouraged.

Susan Wolf
Sportsmen's & Animal Owners' Voting Alliance
Working to Identify and Elect Supportive Legislators
saova@earthlink.net

CENTER FOR ANIMAL LAW STUDIES (CALS)
CALS announced as part of its summer 2013 program a two credit course, Animal Law: Policy Influences through Legislation, Lobbying, Litigation taught by Nancy Perry, National Center for Animal Law Board Member.  Perry is also the VP of Government Affairs at HSUS. She oversees federal and state legislative campaigns, litigation, regulatory affairs, and grassroots activities. Previously, as the grassroots coordinator, she spearheaded state animal protection ballot initiatives and coordinated litigation strategies.   The class will be held at the ASPCA offices in Washington DC.   The course will survey the legislative and regulatory process for contemporary issues, and the role of lobbying and litigation as tactics to protect animals at the local, state, and national level. The course will address a wide variety of topics: legislative drafting; lobbying strategies; federal, state and local legislative approaches; application and enforcement of federal statutes such as the Animal Welfare Act, the Humane Slaughter Act, the Horse Protection Act, the Endangered Species Act, the Marine Mammal Protection Act, the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, and the Wild Horses and Burros Act;  state laws and citizen initiatives concerning anti-cruelty, hunting, trapping, animal fighting, performing animals, and farm animals; consumer protection actions. The goal of this course is to expose students to the daily forums, procedures and unique challenges for animal law practitioners in the nation’s capital, to reinforce critical concepts for informed advocacy and give students hands on experience to prepare them to engage in the political, legislative and litigation work for animals.

2012 HUMANE LEGISLATOR OF THE YEAR
May, 2013.  Former US Senator Scott Brown (R-MA) took top honors from HSUS/HSLF as the 2012 Humane Legislator of the Year.  Brown was honored for:

• Co-leading efforts to remove a polar bear trophy import provision from the Sportsmen's Act of 2012 which would have allowed importation of polar bear trophies taken in Canadian sport hunts before the polar bear was listed on the Endangered Species Act;
• Original cosponsorship of the Egg Products Inspection Act to set federal government regulated standards for housing and raising egg-laying hens;
• Cosponsorship of the American Horse Slaughter Prevention Act to ban the slaughter of horses for human consumption;
• Cosponsoring the PUPS Act, S. 707, to license and federally regulate retail sellers of dogs;
• And for sending a letter to USDA urging the agency to expedite its Proposed Retail Pet Sellers Rule.

In February Fox News Channel hired Brown as a contributor, stating that Brown’s dedication to out-of-the box thinking on key issues made him an important voice in the country.

2014 BALLOT MEASURES
Arkansas Ballot Measure Signature Requirements Amendment would require ballot issue groups to collect at least 75% of the valid signatures required in order to receive additional time to gather extra signatures once the petition has been turned in to the Secretary of State.

Michigan Wolf Hunting Referendum would overturn Public Act 520, a law that allows the state to establish wolf hunting seasons in the Upper Peninsula.  On May 8 Governor Rick Snyder signed into law SB 288 which gives the Natural Resource Commission the authority to declare game animals and establish seasons without the need for action by the legislature. The law essentially renders the 2014 ballot referendum meaningless.

Missouri Right-to-Farm Amendment would add a section to the state constitution that explicitly guarantees farmers and ranchers the right to engage in their livelihoods and produce food for others.

OHIO EXOTIC ANIMAL OWNERS APPEAL
COLUMBUS, Ohio (AP) — Some owners of exotic animals say a new Ohio law is onerous and infringes on their constitutional rights, and they've asked a federal appeals court to strike it down. Under the new law, owners who want to keep their animals must obtain new state-issued permits by Jan. 1, 2014. They must pass background checks, pay fees, obtain liability insurance or surety bonds and show inspectors they can properly contain the animals and care for them. The law exempts sanctuaries, research institutions and facilities accredited by the two national zoo groups. Attorney Robert Owens says in the brief filed with the 6th U.S. District Court of Appeals in Cincinnati that the only way for his clients to qualify for an exemption under the law is for them to join either the Association of Zoos and Aquariums or the Zoological Association of America — groups he says are at odds with his clients.

JASON SMITH WINS MISSOURI SPECIAL ELECTION
State Rep. Jason Smith (R) easily won Missouri’s heavily conservative 8th district special election yesterday.  Smith, the state House speaker pro tem replaces Jo Ann Emerson who resigned earlier this year to work in the private sector.  Smith, age 32, will become one of the youngest members of Congress.  In 2009 Smith received a Legislative Leader Award from SAOVA.

Legislation Briefs April 27, 2013

Dear SAOVA Friends,

Never underestimate the resolve of animal rights organizations to bring an end to animal ownership and breeding as we know it today.  Following release of the APHIS 2014 Budget request, SAOVA reactivated the APHIS Rule Opposition List and it continues to grow. The list is truly an attention-getter; however, we need a HUGE push now to build it even larger before carrying it again to Congressional staff.

If your organization or business is not listed please do so now! EVERY state needs to be represented.  Send an email signed by an officer of the organization stating opposition to the Rule to Susan Wolf: cubhill@earthlink.net.  Please include state where your organization is located.  

The world not only belongs to those who show up, it's controlled by the best informed and most motivated.  Thanks for reading.

Cross posting is encouraged.

Susan Wolf
Sportsmen's & Animal Owners' Voting Alliance
Working to Identify and Elect Supportive Legislators
saova@earthlink.net

DELISTING GRAY WOLVES
Plans have been drafted to lift protections for gray wolves across the Lower 48 states.
Roughly 5,000 wolves are now living in the Northern Rockies and Great Lakes and are believed to be enough to ensure their long-term survival without introducing gray wolves elsewhere, such as the West Coast, parts of New England and the Southern Rockies. According to U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service the rule is under internal review and will be subject to public comment before a final decision is made.

FEDERAL EGG BILLS INTRODUCED
A bill based on the agreement between the HSUS and the United Egg Producers to set standards for egg-laying hens and the labeling of eggs has been introduced by Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA).  Senate Agriculture Committee Chairman Debbie Stabenow (D-MI) and Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME) are cosponsors of S 820.  Rep. Kurt Schrader (D-OR) has introduced a companion bill in the House.  HR 1731 is cosponsored by Representatives John Campbell (R-CA45); Jeff Denham (R-CA10); Sam Farr (D-CA20); Michael Fitzpatrick (R-PA8); and Jared Huffman (D-CA2).

Sources say the United Egg Producers are committed to getting the legislation passed before the end of September. The Egg Bill establishes an approximately 18-year transition period where conventional cages will be phased out and hens will be housed in either enriched cages or in cage-free systems.

Fallout from Prop2, the 2008 HSUS backed ballot initiative in California, continues to threaten the California egg industry as 2015 draws closer and caged eggs will be banned. According to the 2008 UC Davis survey, California produces about 6 percent of the nation's table eggs, and consumes about 12 percent. The value of table egg production in California was about $330 million in 2007 and the industry produced almost 5 billion eggs per year from almost 20 million laying hens.

Although the number of eggs produced by cage-free hens has been increasing the last few years, hens housed in conventional cages are responsible for over 90 percent of egg production in the U.S.

HUDSON VALLEY WEBSITE HACKED
Animal rights activists hacked the website of Hudson Valley Foie Gras — a large U.S. supplier — and sent the names, addresses, phone numbers, and email addresses of their customers to animal rights groups.  North American Animal Liberation Press Office published the information online.  To commemorate Earth Day, hackers targeted Hudson Valley Foie Gras, the largest foie gras farm in the U.S., because they believe the ducks are being tortured.

Never one to let an opportunity for media attention slip by, Animal Legal Defense Fund (ALDF) immediately sent a letter California Attorney General Kamala Harris asking her to investigate purchases by California residents that appeared on the hacked list.  ALDF wrote, “While wealthy restaurateurs and foreign corporations are exploiting California's under enforcement of the foie gras law, the state struggles with a budget crisis and cities flirt with bankruptcy. California taxpayers should not be subsidizing persistent violators when the state is nearly bankrupt and the foie gras law authorizes citations payable to enforcing agencies up to $1,000 per sale.”

AUTISM RESEARCH LAB TRASHED
Activists occupied an animal facility at the University of Milan, Italy releasing mice and rabbits and mixing up cage labels to confuse experimental protocols. Researchers at the university say that it will take years to recover their work. Many of the animals at the facility are genetic models for psychiatric disorders such as autism and schizophrenia. Some of the mice they removed were delicate mutants and immunosuppressed nude mice, which die very quickly outside controlled environments.

Five activists entered laboratories in the university’s pharmacology department on Saturday morning. The lack of signs of a break-in suggests that the activists may have used an illegally acquired electronic card to enter the lab. Activists posted photos of themselves on their website; two of them chained themselves by the neck to the main double doors. The department plans to press charges for theft and trespassing, and to recover financial damages.

Researchers worldwide are being asked to condemn acts these acts of extremism.

JUDGE DISMISSES ALDF LAWSUIT
SANTA CRUZ -- A judge on Tuesday dismissed a lawsuit filed against Santa Cruz Biotechnology Inc. alleging the company abused and neglected goats and rabbits. Santa Cruz County Superior Court Judge Paul Marigonda dismissed the suit filed by the national nonprofit Animal Legal Defense Fund on behalf of an organization called Stop Animal Exploitation Now after ruling that the local court was not the proper forum to address it.  Santa Cruz Biotech supplies antibodies and other research materials to laboratories around the world. Last year it was ranked as the second-largest supplier in the United State's $1.6 billion global market for research antibodies, according to the journal Nature.
Source: Santa Cruz Sentinel http://tinyurl.com/c6w3r3s

MAINE RIGHT TO HUNT AND FISH
Introduced April 2, 2013. Resolution H930 proposes to amend the Constitution of Maine to provide that the citizens of Maine have the personal right to hunt, fish and harvest wildlife, subject to statutes enacted and agency rules that promote wildlife conservation and preserve the future of hunting and fishing, and to provide that public hunting and fishing are a preferred means of managing and controlling wildlife.

ANIMAL ABUSER REGISTRIES
Registry bills were introduced in 16 states for 2013 with multiple bills introduced in New York, Massachusetts, Michigan, and Pennsylvania. The bills do not appear to have any momentum again this year; however, HB3747 in Texas is scheduled for a hearing Monday, April 29, 2013.  Texas residents are urged to oppose this measure.

In Hawaii the Attorney General’s office and the Public Defender’s office submitted testimony in Opposition to the animal abuser registry. The Attorney General noted that only nine (9) potential covered offenders in the past fifteen years would be required to register under this proposed 2013 bill and expressed concern about the resources and funds that would be needed to set up, maintain, administer, and enforce the proposed registry for so few individuals. The Office of the Public Defender stated in their opposition that the registry proposed in this measure makes no sense.  In addition they wrote, “While there is a governmental interest in keeping track of sex offenders, especially those who prey on strangers and children, there is no such interest or similar benefit in keeping track of animal abusers. These individuals do not typically prey on stray animals or pets that belong to strangers. The cases we have seen usually involve individuals abusing their own pets or a business owner and/or employee that mistreat their animals.”  The letter continued, “The funds allocated to maintaining this registry would be better utilized by providing counseling to the offender and/or their family members.”

Sacramento restaurants find loopholes in foie gras ban

Banning foie gras ended up being a boon for its popularity.

The state's July 1 ban on foie gras was supposed to prevent the fatty goose or duck liver from being served at California restaurants. Instead, foie gras has become more popular, and enforcement of the new law has been nearly nonexistent.

Sacramento chefs and others from around California are exposing loopholes in the law, making foie gras fairly easy to find in restaurants despite its blacklisted status. You can find it served at such restaurants as The Kitchen in Sacramento, where foie gras is treated as a complimentary item – not officially for sale and technically, some say, not illegal.

"There's more interest in foie gras now than ever," said Randall Selland, executive chef and owner of The Kitchen. "If you ask to try it, we'll let you have some. It won't be on the menu and there's no extra charge."

Foie gras is produced by force feeding ducks or geese with a funnel and long tube to create an engorged liver, a process known as gavage. Though foie gras has deep roots in France's culinary traditions, gavage has been outlawed in a number of European countries. The California ban was instituted in 2004 with the passage of SB 1520, and given a 7 1/2-year sunset for the law to take effect.

Some California chefs stocked up on foie gras before the ban took effect, with plans to offer it after July 1 as a complimentary item and duck the letter of the law.

"We know what the rules are, but we have enough to last a couple of months," said Selland. "We're waiting to see how this pans out and how it can be done. There's a multitude of ways to do it." Full story at Sacramento Bee

Foie gras ban triggers California lawsuit

A Canadian duck-farming trade organization, a New York producer of duck delicacies and a Los Angeles restaurant group have joined together in a lawsuit to strike down a new California law prohibiting the sale of foie gras.

The suit filed Monday in U.S. District Court in Los Angeles maintains the law, which outlaws force-feeding birds for the purpose of enlarging their livers and selling products from force-fed birds, is unconstitutional, vague and interferes with federal commerce laws.

Michael Tenenbaum, a lawyer for the plaintiffs, said he also plans to ask the court for a preliminary injunction, which would freeze the law until it can be hashed out in court. He said the request would be made soon, but gave no further details.

The foie gras ban went into effect Sunday. More: at SFGate

ALDF Lawsuit against Woodland Park Zoo dismissed

By Michael Simeona
MyNorthwest.com Editor

A lawsuit filed against the Woodland Park Zoo and city of Seattle for the treatment of elephants was dismissed by King County Superior Court Judge Michael Heavey on Friday.

Activists from the Animal Legal Defense Fund argued that the city of Seattle was acting illegally in providing support for the Woodland Park Zoo because of its treatment of elephants.

Judge Heavey dismissed the suit because the group had no standing to sue the city, and there was nothing illegal about the city's funding of the zoo.

"We are very pleased with the ruling," said Zoo President and CEO Dr. Deborah Jensen. "This was an attempt to get a court to decide issues of elephant care and medicine that have been appropriately delegated to experts - at our zoo and at other zoos around the country." Full story at link

Senate approves Pearson for U.S. District Court in Northern Ohio

Judge Pearson was recommended for the District Court position by Sen. Sherrod Brown and nominated by President Obama in December, 2009.

Pearson is currently an Adjunct Professor at Cleveland-Marshall College of Law where she teaches Animal Law. Listed in her Senate questionnaire responses were memberships in Animal Legal Defense Fund (ALDF), Humane Society of the United States (HSUS), and American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA). Senate Questionnaire for Judicial Nominees

Her association with animal rights groups, particularly ALDF, was questioned by Senator Jeff Sessions (R, AL):

"In your questionnaire, you noted that you are a member of the Animal Legal Defense Fund (“ALDF”). As you noted during your hearing, you also teach Animal Law at Cleveland-Marshall College of Law. According to the syllabus you provided, your course includes a section devoted to constitutional standing. The ALDF advocates that animals should be considered “legal persons” and have “standing” in court. Do you believe that animals should be conferred legal standing to bring a lawsuit?"

Judge Pearson Response: Existing laws do not confer standing upon animals. On a case by case basis, however, courts have addressed whether standing should be conferred upon the legal representative of an animal. See, e.g., Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555 (1992) (finding that respondent lacked standing); Animal Legal Defense Fund v. Glickman, 154 F.3d 426 (D.C. Cir. 1998) (en banc) (finding ALDF had standing to challenge the treatment of primates). If confirmed as a United States District Judge, I will enforce applicable legal precedent.

The National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA) expressed its opposition to Pearson's nomination as a federal judge, claiming she has ties to animal activists and urged Senate members to vote against her appointment. NCBA Vice President of Government Affairs Colin Woodall said Pearson’s connections to the Animal Legal Defense Fund, an organization that advocates giving animals the same legal rights as humans, would make it difficult for her to be an impartial judge in cases regarding actions by animal rights activists.

December 21, 2010. U.S. Senate confirmed U.S. Magistrate Judge Benita Y. Pearson by a vote of 56-39 to sit on the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio.

ANIMAL LEGAL DEFENSE FUND
ALDF describes itself as attorneys active in shaping the emerging field of animal law. They specialize in "filing groundbreaking lawsuits to stop animal abuse and expand the boundaries of animal law." ALDF advocates changing the legal status of animals from property to personhood.

“Everything we are doing lays the foundation for the one day when animals will have rights" ....“We need to get in their faces and sue the animal users so often they don’t know which courtroom they’re supposed to appear in next.” Valerie Stanley, ALDF Attorney June, 1996

ALDF is a partner in The Great Ape Legal Project, a joint project between ALDF and the Great Ape Project International, working to establish legal rights for nonhuman great apes.

The ALDF website explains, "Through this groundbreaking enterprise, ALDF is working to improve the legal status of nonhuman animals, who continue to be viewed by the courts — despite the clearer vision of scientists, philosophers and animal guardians everywhere — as mere property. "Animals have never been made a part of our legal system," explains ALDF President Steve Ann Chambers. "As a result, there is no legal recourse when they're exploited and abused."

According to the Great Ape Project mission statement, "the exploitation of great primates in laboratories, circus, entertainment shows and zoos can be considered a kind of slavery, reminding what men used to do with others of his own kind who were considered to be inferior a little bit more than one century ago."

ALDF also works to establish Student Animal Legal Defense Fund Chapters at Law Schools. Student chapters work with ALDF to advance the interests of animals through the legal system. Currently 152 U.S Chapters and 8 International Chapters have been established.