North Carolina HSUS dog bill shelved
July 7, 2010 by Julie Harker Brownfield Ag News
A bill backed by the Humane Society of the U.S. (HSUS) aimed at regulating dog breeders in North Carolina has been shelved as that state’s legislative session winds down. One of the groups fighting the measure is the Sportsmen’s and Animal Owner’s Voting Alliance. President Susan Wolf says the bill, which passed the North Carolina Senate by one vote last year, was “reactive legislation” to a large substandard kennel taken over by animal control officials. Wolf says the HSUS proposal would regulate dog owners with 15 or more dogs,
“For somebody that has one pet dog, it may sound like a lot of dogs, but anyone that has any husbandry knowledge or raising dogs or has a pack of hunting dogs knows that’s not a lot of dogs.”
Wolf says there’s no doubt that it’s part of an HSUS campaign against North Carolina agriculture, “They are working the restaurants, trying to get them to buy cage-free eggs. They have started to work the Farm Tours with their propaganda to drive a wedge between the ag community.
Wolf says they all must work together to fight HSUS, “If we don’t all learn the agenda and work together, we’re going to be buried under legislation.
While the bill got hung up in committee at the tail end of the North Carolina legislative session, which likely ends this Friday, Wolf says the fight isn’t over because the HSUS-backed bill WILL be back next year.
Saturday, July 10, 2010
Thursday, July 8, 2010
Puppy Uniform Protection and Safety Act (PUPS)
The Sportsmen’s & Animal Owners’ Voting Alliance (SAOVA) is OPPOSED to HR 5434/S 3424 Puppy Uniform Protection and Safety Act (PUPS) in its entirety.
For over a decade the Humane Society of The United States (HSUS) and other anti-animal use groups have introduced federal legislation to restrict breeding of dogs and/or cats at the retail level. Their proposed legislation would amend the Animal Welfare Act (AWA) with strict regulations on retail breeders.
As with all previous versions of HSUS introduced bills to break the commercial / retail barrier, PUPS subjects home breeders and rescuers of dogs to USDA licensure and its 60+ pages of regulations. PUPS misleads legislators and the public into thinking this legislation will put an end to puppy mills when in fact PUPS will serve to eliminate many fine sources of home-bred puppies and close down rescue efforts.
As written, PUPS will negatively impact many in-home breeders who cannot comply with commercial standards or who refuse to have their rights to privacy invaded by federal inspectors. PUPS will drive many midsize producers of pets and working dogs away from their hobbies and livelihoods. PUPS poor language and arbitrary use of numbers for licensing criteria will negatively impact even the rescue community.
Read the full SAOVA statement. View links to previous bills to remove the commercial/retail sales barrier and related documents.
For over a decade the Humane Society of The United States (HSUS) and other anti-animal use groups have introduced federal legislation to restrict breeding of dogs and/or cats at the retail level. Their proposed legislation would amend the Animal Welfare Act (AWA) with strict regulations on retail breeders.
As with all previous versions of HSUS introduced bills to break the commercial / retail barrier, PUPS subjects home breeders and rescuers of dogs to USDA licensure and its 60+ pages of regulations. PUPS misleads legislators and the public into thinking this legislation will put an end to puppy mills when in fact PUPS will serve to eliminate many fine sources of home-bred puppies and close down rescue efforts.
As written, PUPS will negatively impact many in-home breeders who cannot comply with commercial standards or who refuse to have their rights to privacy invaded by federal inspectors. PUPS will drive many midsize producers of pets and working dogs away from their hobbies and livelihoods. PUPS poor language and arbitrary use of numbers for licensing criteria will negatively impact even the rescue community.
Read the full SAOVA statement. View links to previous bills to remove the commercial/retail sales barrier and related documents.
Saturday, July 3, 2010
State's deal with HSUS might not be end of conflict
"Raising 10 billion land animals in the United States annually for food is simply not a sensible plan of action," Pacelle wrote. "The science is clear that a diet that is primarily plant-based is better for our personal health, and it's obviously better for animals and the environment." Wayne Pacelle. A Humane Nation blog October 8, 2009
That quote sums up the HSUS philosophy on animal agriculture. There is no common ground with an agenda that removes animal-use.
State's deal with HSUS might not be end of conflict
Chillicothe Gazette July 3, 2010
For months, the spectre of a fall statewide issue related to animal cruelty promised to create a showdown between animal activists and the farming community in Ohio.
But a last minute deal brokered by Gov. Ted Strickland brought together the animal rights and farm groups for a deal that boosts both sides.
The deal calls for Strickland, the Humane Society, the Ohio Farm Bureau and their partners to join forces in favor of tougher laws governing farm animals, including provisions that ban certain crates and cages and the use of strangulation as a form of euthanasia.
It also calls for setting felony-level penalties for cock fighting, cracking down on puppy mills and promoting a ban on future exotic pet purchases.
The farming community took a hit recently when a video from a Plain City farm showed brutal treatment of cows there.
Animal rights groups, including the Humane Society of the United States, were accused of harassing and dishonest practices to get the signatures needed on petitions.
As Strickland said in a Wednesday press conference, the still-unsigned deal was necessary to avoid a bitter campaign war.
But a closer look reveals Ohio isn't out of the woods just yet.
Full story at link
That quote sums up the HSUS philosophy on animal agriculture. There is no common ground with an agenda that removes animal-use.
State's deal with HSUS might not be end of conflict
Chillicothe Gazette July 3, 2010
For months, the spectre of a fall statewide issue related to animal cruelty promised to create a showdown between animal activists and the farming community in Ohio.
But a last minute deal brokered by Gov. Ted Strickland brought together the animal rights and farm groups for a deal that boosts both sides.
The deal calls for Strickland, the Humane Society, the Ohio Farm Bureau and their partners to join forces in favor of tougher laws governing farm animals, including provisions that ban certain crates and cages and the use of strangulation as a form of euthanasia.
It also calls for setting felony-level penalties for cock fighting, cracking down on puppy mills and promoting a ban on future exotic pet purchases.
The farming community took a hit recently when a video from a Plain City farm showed brutal treatment of cows there.
Animal rights groups, including the Humane Society of the United States, were accused of harassing and dishonest practices to get the signatures needed on petitions.
As Strickland said in a Wednesday press conference, the still-unsigned deal was necessary to avoid a bitter campaign war.
But a closer look reveals Ohio isn't out of the woods just yet.
Full story at link
Friday, July 2, 2010
HSUS extortion in Ohio
Earlier this week California’s AB1437 cage-free egg bill was sent to Governor Schwarzenegger for signature. The bill extends Prop 2 standards to out-of-state eggs by criminalizing importation of eggs that are not cage-free. According to a U.C. Davis study, one third of California eggs are imported. Schwarzenegger, who opposed Prop 2, has until Tuesday to sign or veto the bill.
Following on the heels of this addition to the Prop 2 saga, Ohio Governor Ted Strickland and state agricultural leaders compromised with HSUS to prevent a November ballot initiative. Governor Strickland has been quoted as saying, “The agreement represents a joint push to find common ground."
It is unlikely this deal will keep HSUS satisfied for long in their insatiable drive to undermine animal agriculture and any other animal related venues in Ohio.
In brokering this deal, HSUS extortionists went beyond the livestock initiative threat to bludgeon Ohio dog breeders by demanding “legislation to crack down on puppy mills”, which generally translates to mean over-regulating dog breeders to a point that defies common sense.
The following press release from our friends at Animal Agriculture Alliance says it all.
Agriculture Industry Must Learn From Disappointing Outcome in Ohio
Following on the heels of this addition to the Prop 2 saga, Ohio Governor Ted Strickland and state agricultural leaders compromised with HSUS to prevent a November ballot initiative. Governor Strickland has been quoted as saying, “The agreement represents a joint push to find common ground."
It is unlikely this deal will keep HSUS satisfied for long in their insatiable drive to undermine animal agriculture and any other animal related venues in Ohio.
In brokering this deal, HSUS extortionists went beyond the livestock initiative threat to bludgeon Ohio dog breeders by demanding “legislation to crack down on puppy mills”, which generally translates to mean over-regulating dog breeders to a point that defies common sense.
The following press release from our friends at Animal Agriculture Alliance says it all.
Agriculture Industry Must Learn From Disappointing Outcome in Ohio
Tuesday, June 29, 2010
CA: Out-of-state egg bill goes to governor
In 2008, HSUS steered a successful ballot campaign convincing Californians that hen-laying chickens needed more room to move. Additional legislation now bans all sources of eggs from caged hens from being imported, sold, and used in the state of California as well as threatening producers and suppliers with jail time. It remains to be seen how animal rights philosophy, now permanently injected into California law, will impact the food supply for California citizens.
By WES SANDER Capital Press
A bill that would apply California's animal-welfare law to out-of-state egg producers has gone to Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's desk without the amendments that producers originally hoped for.
The bill, AB1437, would apply the rules created by Proposition 2 to producers whose shelled eggs are sold in California. Prop. 2, enacted by voters in 2008, mandates that food-animal enclosures allow freedom of movement. It applies mostly to the state's egg production.
California's egg industry saw the bill, by Assemblyman Jared Huffman, D-San Rafael, as an opportunity to define the cage sizes permissible under Prop. 2. But the Humane Society of the United States, the initiative's principal proponent, has argued that there exist no commercially viable cages that could satisfy the law.
Producers have said they need the cage sizes specified in order to plan construction of new barns and approach banks for financing. With Prop. 2 set to take effect in 2015, time is beginning to run short, said Dennis Albiani, spokesman for the Association of California Egg Farmers.
"We will continue to pursue that," Albiani said. "We'll work with the administration, we'll work with the Legislature. We do believe that ambiguity is difficult to deal with for a producer."
Huffman put his bill on hold last July to allow the sides to settle the argument. But an unrelated court decision later established that a ballot initiative cannot be amended by the Legislature.
The state's egg industry has taken a neutral stance on Huffman's bill. It is divided among members who produce in California only, those who produce in and out of state and those who purchase outside eggs to supplement deliveries.
HSUS said it pushed for a "performance-based" standard for the statute, mandating that animals be allowed to move freely.
An "engineering" standard specifying cage measurements would have generated resistance for "over-architecting how farmers produce," HSUS California director Jennifer Fearing said.
Fearing said the standard also leaves the possibility open for future systems that might comply. Currently, only a cage-free system offers that possibility, despite farmers' protests that it allows hens to pile up in corners and results in dirty conditions, Fearing said. "Good animal welfare is at least possible in a cage-free environment," she said.
By WES SANDER Capital Press
A bill that would apply California's animal-welfare law to out-of-state egg producers has gone to Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's desk without the amendments that producers originally hoped for.
The bill, AB1437, would apply the rules created by Proposition 2 to producers whose shelled eggs are sold in California. Prop. 2, enacted by voters in 2008, mandates that food-animal enclosures allow freedom of movement. It applies mostly to the state's egg production.
California's egg industry saw the bill, by Assemblyman Jared Huffman, D-San Rafael, as an opportunity to define the cage sizes permissible under Prop. 2. But the Humane Society of the United States, the initiative's principal proponent, has argued that there exist no commercially viable cages that could satisfy the law.
Producers have said they need the cage sizes specified in order to plan construction of new barns and approach banks for financing. With Prop. 2 set to take effect in 2015, time is beginning to run short, said Dennis Albiani, spokesman for the Association of California Egg Farmers.
"We will continue to pursue that," Albiani said. "We'll work with the administration, we'll work with the Legislature. We do believe that ambiguity is difficult to deal with for a producer."
Huffman put his bill on hold last July to allow the sides to settle the argument. But an unrelated court decision later established that a ballot initiative cannot be amended by the Legislature.
The state's egg industry has taken a neutral stance on Huffman's bill. It is divided among members who produce in California only, those who produce in and out of state and those who purchase outside eggs to supplement deliveries.
HSUS said it pushed for a "performance-based" standard for the statute, mandating that animals be allowed to move freely.
An "engineering" standard specifying cage measurements would have generated resistance for "over-architecting how farmers produce," HSUS California director Jennifer Fearing said.
Fearing said the standard also leaves the possibility open for future systems that might comply. Currently, only a cage-free system offers that possibility, despite farmers' protests that it allows hens to pile up in corners and results in dirty conditions, Fearing said. "Good animal welfare is at least possible in a cage-free environment," she said.
Wednesday, June 23, 2010
HSUS Files FTC Complaint Against Rose Acre Farms
HSUS continues to wage war against the agricultural community. If the "clandestine" undercover video actually showed any wrong-doing on the part of Rose Acre, HSUS would have jumped at the chance to bring in federal inspectors rather than merely write to FTC.
The Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) filed a complaint this week with the Federal Trade Commission asking it to order Rose Acre Farms to stop making "false and misleading animal welfare claims."
The complaint accuses Rose Acre, through its promotions, web sites and spokespeople, of falsely stating that the company, the second-largest commercial egg producer in the U.S., provides a "humane and friendly environment" for its hens. HSUS said this is "grossly misleading."
HSUS referred to clandestinely filmed video at three of the company's hen houses in Iowa that "found conditions starkly at odds with the cheerful claims of the company" (Feedstuffs, April 12).
Rose Acre attorney Joe Miller said the company has not yet seen the complaint but stands behind its animal welfare program "and the humane way that we treat our animals."
The Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) filed a complaint this week with the Federal Trade Commission asking it to order Rose Acre Farms to stop making "false and misleading animal welfare claims."
The complaint accuses Rose Acre, through its promotions, web sites and spokespeople, of falsely stating that the company, the second-largest commercial egg producer in the U.S., provides a "humane and friendly environment" for its hens. HSUS said this is "grossly misleading."
HSUS referred to clandestinely filmed video at three of the company's hen houses in Iowa that "found conditions starkly at odds with the cheerful claims of the company" (Feedstuffs, April 12).
Rose Acre attorney Joe Miller said the company has not yet seen the complaint but stands behind its animal welfare program "and the humane way that we treat our animals."
Wednesday, May 12, 2010
MO senators aim to quell HSUS puppy proposal
May 12, 2010 by Julie Harker
Some Missouri Senators are pushing back on the HSUS-backed ballot initiative proposal that would severely restrict dog breeding practices in Missouri. The push-back proposal would require ANY petition issue placing ANY controls on animal agriculture to get a two-thirds majority to pass. It would set ag apart from all other issues that might go to the voters through petition campaigns.
Agriculture interests say the dog breeding proposal is OVER regulation in a state that was the first to pass comprehensive dog breeding rules, “It is a model used by all other states. So, to say that Missouri does not have (adequate) regulations is simply not the case,” says sponsor Bill Stouffer of Napton who says most in ag agree that the so-called “puppy mill” proposal is a precursor to a later petition aimed at killing livestock production.
And, Joplin Senator Gary Nodler says the term “puppy mill” is inflammatory language that stirs public emotion, “If that term is applied broadly to everybody that’s a dog breeder, it’s an unfair term. It’s a pejorative. It’s almost like – to use the term ‘puppy term’ it’s almost like using racial slurs.”
Senator Frank Barnitz of Lake Spring said the HSUS-backed ballot proposal to increase regulations on dog breeders is a threat to animal agriculture and he says pet-raising has saved a lot of farmers when the hog markets fell, “And they came up with these care standards of which fit very well for those hog producers that no longer were producing feeder pigs. So, then they had another mechanism to make money in agriculture and be able to raise their families and be able to stay on the farms.”
Barnitz says strict regulations as proposed by the HSUS and other animal rights groups would kill Missouri’s dog breeding industry, “It’d be like we going to Ford and saying, you know, ‘We appreciate you in Missouri, we’d like for you to be here. You can produce (only) a thousand cars.’”
The so-called “puppy mill” proposal would limit breeders to 50 sexually-intact female dogs. The Humane Society of the US says Missouri is the number one state for “puppy mills”, a term the animal rights activist group created.
Stouffer says he’s confident his proposed amendment can get through the Senate and then the House to get on this year’s November election ballot. IT would only need a simple majority from Missouri voters to become law.
Some Missouri Senators are pushing back on the HSUS-backed ballot initiative proposal that would severely restrict dog breeding practices in Missouri. The push-back proposal would require ANY petition issue placing ANY controls on animal agriculture to get a two-thirds majority to pass. It would set ag apart from all other issues that might go to the voters through petition campaigns.
Agriculture interests say the dog breeding proposal is OVER regulation in a state that was the first to pass comprehensive dog breeding rules, “It is a model used by all other states. So, to say that Missouri does not have (adequate) regulations is simply not the case,” says sponsor Bill Stouffer of Napton who says most in ag agree that the so-called “puppy mill” proposal is a precursor to a later petition aimed at killing livestock production.
And, Joplin Senator Gary Nodler says the term “puppy mill” is inflammatory language that stirs public emotion, “If that term is applied broadly to everybody that’s a dog breeder, it’s an unfair term. It’s a pejorative. It’s almost like – to use the term ‘puppy term’ it’s almost like using racial slurs.”
Senator Frank Barnitz of Lake Spring said the HSUS-backed ballot proposal to increase regulations on dog breeders is a threat to animal agriculture and he says pet-raising has saved a lot of farmers when the hog markets fell, “And they came up with these care standards of which fit very well for those hog producers that no longer were producing feeder pigs. So, then they had another mechanism to make money in agriculture and be able to raise their families and be able to stay on the farms.”
Barnitz says strict regulations as proposed by the HSUS and other animal rights groups would kill Missouri’s dog breeding industry, “It’d be like we going to Ford and saying, you know, ‘We appreciate you in Missouri, we’d like for you to be here. You can produce (only) a thousand cars.’”
The so-called “puppy mill” proposal would limit breeders to 50 sexually-intact female dogs. The Humane Society of the US says Missouri is the number one state for “puppy mills”, a term the animal rights activist group created.
Stouffer says he’s confident his proposed amendment can get through the Senate and then the House to get on this year’s November election ballot. IT would only need a simple majority from Missouri voters to become law.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
