Ethnic Cleansing for Pit Bulls
DNA-based breed identi-kits
99 44/100% pure what?
HSUS and AKC partner up on DNA profiling.
Does it get any worse?
Sonia Dias' suit against the City of Denver -- hyped as the long-awaited animal protectionist salvation of "pit bulls" from one of the most brutal animal control policies in the country -- shows its true colors.
Purity of blood, Humane Society of the United States-style
In its sly amicus brief in support of Dias, the Humane Society of the United States, an animal extremist organization which condones, endorses and lobbies for breed specific legislation,
bases itself on the subjective nature of breed standards and their unsuitability for identifying dogs impacted by breed specific restrictions.
This is not a new argument. Dog lovers have been arguing--for a long, long time, both in and out of court--that breed standards adopted by registries such as the American Kennel Club and the United Kennel Club were never intended for such a purpose and are unconstitutionally vague.
Someone spent some time at the library and on PubMed's website, it seems. . .
Blood. The newest arbiter of race breed
HSUS' amicus asserts that "researchers concluded 'microsatellite' DNA testing enables researchers "to assign 99% of dogs to the correct breed." But HSUS lies.
In the one cited study that yielded a 99% result, researchers used DNA from a mere 414 dogs representing only 85 of the 152 breeds recognized by the American Kennel Club.
The American Kennel Club doesn't recognize the American Pit Bull Terrier. In fact, the AKC doesn't recognize a long list of breeds, including the Catahoula (the state dog of Louisiana), the Cane Corso (the breed owned by Pete Georgoutsos, one of Blue Dog State's biggest heros), the Dogo Argentino (often misidentified as a "pit bull"), and depending on how you slice and dice it, something like 250 other breeds.
Would those dogs all be labelled mutts, using HSUS's suggested methodology? Because it could really matter. An exemption from mandatory spay-neuter requirements so that you can breed your line of mutts just ain't happening.
Whose DNA is it, anyway?
When the AKC solicited DNA samples from its constituents, ostensibly to screen for genetically-linked canine illnesses. . .did everyone sign a release like this one ?
I hereby relinquish all rights to, and ownership of, the DNA sample.
Not much wiggle room, is there? If you don't own your dog's DNA, what do you own? Huh?
The AKC/UC-Davis Database: Money in the bank
With all the whining Ron Menaker's been doing about revenues, and hints about making changes. . .did Ron already cut a deal? 
MMI Genomics, the manufacturer of the kits, is a long-time AKC partner.
The company has offered genetic parentage testing for purebreds through the AKC since 1998. The service compares a given dog's genes to the genes of its parents to verify paternity.
The kennel club has also built a genetics database including information from hundreds of thousands of purebred dogs. This database allows for DNA comparison to clients' animals for a match, said kennel club spokeswoman Daisy Okas.
Did all those dog owners that donated canine DNA, thinking the DNA was going to be used for medical research . . .get ripped off? Did they mistakenly contribute to the destruction of dog breeding as we know it?
Not pure enough. Savvy the AmStaff fails his DNA test. No puppies for Savvy. "Science" says he's a mongrel.
Open up. In the name of the law.
If HSUS -- and the AKC -- get their way and municipalities discard pedigrees in favor of DNA swabs. . .will every short-haired dog owner in the country have to submit the dog to a DNA test? At $119.99 each?
Will the test rely on an AKC-owned database?
Will thousands and thousands of dogs be relegated to mutt status and surgically sterilized ?
One generation and out. That's always the goal when it comes to HSUS.
5 comments:
Don't forget the AKC required all stud owners to submit dna cheek swabs for all dogs after 4 litters.
Any challenge to BSL should be based on the violations of the US Constitution.
Exactly.
While I like the argument about standards being unconstitutionally vague because it's undeniably true, it's obvious that the DNA tie-in is part of the HSUS agenda.
There isn't one company that brags about 99% accuracy. There isn't one company that can accurately identify mixed breed dogs at all through DNA - and I stand by that statement with confidence.
So, since 'purebred' dogs are just isolated groups of mutts, with very few exceptions they should ALL show a mixed-breed heritage. I obviously won't name the exceptions here - but it's a handful of breeds.
While this approach can save so-called 'pit bulls' from being identified as targeted breeds, you are absolutely right about the obvious outcome of encouraging the Useful Idiots and fifth columnists in government to insert these 'tests' where standards exist now.
Mandatory neutering coupled with these tests will be a slam dunk for the HSUS and its ilk.
The reason I decided not to participate in the Behaviour Genetics study was because I decided I didn't want to give ownership of my dogs' DNA to somebody else. That's also why, despite my desire to prove it's a crock, I've avoided trying these much-touted tests that are marketed to suckers.
And it was some nice of the AKC to sell out their members - again.
Agreed, the DNA cannot prove beyond a reasonable doubt in most dogs, so using it would be dicey at best. But HSUS put that in there for probably 2 reasons, one-to make more money since they have probably invested in it, and 2 to get rid of dogs if an agency is so stupid as to believe it should be used.
Blue Dog, guess who is now trying to get the auditor job in Pierce County (Washington) who would be in charge of licensing our beloved dogs? AKC breeders are united not to have Jules selected for this important job.
Great story,the AKC is very powerful and they can use DNA to make their standards even higher,we;ll see
Post a Comment