Blue Dog State

Fake Cops from the SPCA

2011-11-19T19:28:00.004-05:00

This guy? Not a cop. Not a public servant.
He's a self-employed lawyer in police officer drag.

Posse of volunteers will lay down the law in Schenectady

Signed, sealed and delivered. Public accountability? Transparency in government? Not so much.

The contract approved by the Schenectady County legislature awarding the private Schenectady County SPCA 50% of any money they can gouge out of dog owners through enforcement of licensing, leash and dangerous dog laws, plus control of the balance of the money and access to vehicles purchased and maintained at taxpayer expense took effect on November 15.

So where's the fire ?

Under the terms of the contract, the SCSPCA's volunteers--whoever they may be, because the contract doesn't require them to be peace officers--will have no supervision from the County and are specifically exempted from the rules and regulations applicable to County employees as they go about their public law enforcement activities.

Apparently, Schenectady County was willing to sign just about anything to get out from under the shaky lawsuit the SPCA brought against them. The lawsuit was filed on October 7, the so-called "Vicious Dog Law of 2011" was proposed by October 14, and by October 28 the County Attorney was declaring the whole mess a 'win-win' and urging county legislators to get on board. By the November 9 meeting of the county legislature, it was a done deal.

What makes me think there is more to this story?

Burning, burning desire to address "vicious" dogs?

Yeah, right.

The "vicious dog law" turned out to be a sweetheart contract between the SPCA and Schenectady County ultimately giving a private corporation control of 100% of monies it generates by the enforcement of state laws. No provisions for audit, and no opportunity for public oversight over the disposition of public monies.

Plus freebie vehicles and maintenance, and some other perks--all at taxpayer expense.

On November 11, the head of the SCSPCA Mathew B. Tully (pictured above) announced that he is resigning. In discussing his "proactive" approach to law enforcement, Tully commented that the "end game" in his suit against the County is to ensure the viability of the SCSPCA.

Schenectady, you was played. Majorly played.

Rhinestone cowboys as bounty hunters

I guess I could volunteer for the Schenectady County SPCA and become a ~~vigilante~~ uh ~~hobbyist law enforcer~~ umm "Schenectady County Contractor", too.

Why not? I bet I'd look kewl in that navy blue uni and the tool belt and whatnot, too.

I'd probably scare the crap out of dog owners unable to produce a dog license. They'd practically be throwing the cash at me, especially if I were to mention that unlicensed dogs in NYS are subject to immediate impoundment.

Then there are those people whose 10 year-old dogs accidentally escape out the back door for the first time in their lives. Looks like there's good money to be made by not-for-profits in loose dogs. $565 to bail out a stray dog from a shelter operated by a "not for profit"?

Dang. . .

As long as the private not-for-profit holds a contract from the municipality, looks like they're golden. And the Schenectady County contract says specifically that the County will not supervise the SPCA's activities. Can it get any better?

Freedom of Information? Not in Schenectady.

What happens when the citizens of Schenectady County start to ask questions about how public laws are enforced ?

What records will be available to them?

Will they be required to sue a private not-for-profit corporation, which--not for nothing--is staffed by volunteer lawyers, in order to gain access to records which would normally be available to them?

End Games: Private and public.

Schenectady, you've got a crew of volunteers--responsible to no public official--enforcing the law with a "proactive" focus. They take 50% off the top for themselves, and ultimately they have access to 100% of the revenues they generate through their law enforcement activities. Talk about a motive for frivolous prosecutions. . .

The County is doing its best to distance itself from the consequences and wash its hands of any responsibility.

Good luck with that, Schenectady County legislators and public officials. And may you rot in hell.

I don't think this is going to end well.

Not at all.

Extorting Schenectady: New York SPCA Shows True Colors

2011-11-07T08:30:00.007-05:00

Note: What goes around comes around.

Blue Dog State first wrote about the Schenectady SPCA and its "fergit shelters, we gonna arrest you" mission in a piece called

Armed Volunteers: Weapons, Mace and Body Armor back in May, 2008.

New Revenue Scheme for Animal Extremist Innovator
Schenectady SPCA sets itself up for 50% off the top
. . . thanks to its lawsuit against the Sheriff

Private persons associated on a volunteer basis with a private corporation and a clear animal extremist agenda will be independently enforcing dog control laws in Schenectady County -- without having to answer to county officials -- if legislators approve the "Vicious Dog Control Law of 2011" on November 9.

As payment, the private corporation will receive 50% of all fines paid to the county stemming from their enforcement of state dog laws. The remaining 50% of the monies paid by Schenectady dog owners pursuant to the enforcement of public laws will also go to the SCSPCA, in compensation for sheltering impounded animals.

The Schenectady SPCA does not operate a shelter and it never has.

As an added bonus when the contract gets signed, the private SCSPCA gains access to vehicles purchased and maintained at taxpayer expense.

In exchange for the money, the contract to enforce dog control regulations throughout the county, and the vehicles, the SCSPCA agrees to drop the lawsuit it filed against the Schenectady County Sheriff.

Mathew Tully's SCSPCA initiated the suit in October when the SPCA -- which, again, does not operate a shelter and never has -- seized roughly 40 cats and a dog pursuant to its investigation of animal cruelty allegations.

The SCSPCA insisted that County Sheriff Dominic Dagostino accept custody and responsibility for the animals pending adjudication of the charges. When that didn't happen--the Sheriff cited financial constraints and lack of facilities--the Schenectady County SPCA sued him.

Cty. Sheriff Dagostino

In the meantime, the SPCA killed the impounded dog and about a third of the impounded cats. They had fleas.

Although the numbers in the various press accounts vary, it appears that some of the remaining survivors of the "rescue" were farmed out to the ~~illegal pre-adjudication forfeiture gulag~~ "humane" network of fosters and shelters. Seems at least some sheltering alternatives were available, after all. Surprise, surprise.

Blue Dog believes that for all practical purposes those remaining cats might just as well have vanished from the face of the planet. Whether they've since been killed, sold, given away, or simply "lost" in the system, they will not be available as evidential exhibits.

Follow the trail of dead cats

Setting aside the drama and the accusations, what really happened as a result of the Great SCSPCA Cat Seize?

Many of the animals the SCSPCA impounded (allegedly flea-ridden, but still alive) are now dead.

Their owner, described in the press as a conscience-stricken "rescuer" who gradually became overwhelmed, awaits her day in court under the forlorn theory that she is innocent of deliberate and calculated cruelty to animals until proven guilty. While 40 or more animals were seized from her home, she was only charged with one count of cruelty. Innocent or not, the animals are history. They will never be returned to her, even if she is cleared of the charges.

The County appears to be submitting to pressure from a small private corporation with an adrenalin-driven lawyer at the helm. Schenectady County exhibits zero understanding of New York's Agriculture and Markets laws. . .and worse yet, zero concern for the civil rights of its dog and animal owning residents.

And the SCSPCA ? Tully is a lawyer, as are several of his volunteers, and he uses his law firm as an operations center for the SCSPCA. As a result of filing a lawsuit using in-house legal services, Tully stands to gain an immediate 50% cut on any revenue they can generate by enforcing dangerous dog, leash and dog licensing laws in Schenectady County, plus control of the balance of the public monies collected pursuant to a state law.

How sick is this picture?

And who the freak is Mathew Tully, Esq., and his band of 10 or 12 volunteers-soon-to-be-Schenectady dog control contractors?

You better sit down, kids

Currently, Mathew Tully is the. . .

Chief Commanding Officer of the SCSPCA,

the Director of the SCSPCA,Chief of Department of the SCSPCA,

the President of the SCSPCA,Chief Humane Law Enforcement Officer of the SCSPCA,

and the Chairman of the Board of Directors of the SCSPCA.

But Tully first hit the radar for many animal owners back in 2002 when, acting as a volunteer, he fraudulently misrepresented himself as an officer of the Columbia-Greene Humane Society and seized 15 dogs from a dog retailer. The dogs were valued at approximately $9000, and were subsequently sold by the CGHS, which retained the proceeds.

Mad extortion skillz

According to sworn testimony included in court records,

Tully . . . told [the dog owners] that, unless they immediately signed a document surrendering the 15 puppies on their premises to the Society, he would arrest them upon a misdemeanor charge of violating Agriculture and Markets Law § 357. They allege in their verified complaint that Tully, who is also an attorney, told them that it would be one or two days before they were arraigned, that he would ask for high bail and that he would "demand that [their five] children be placed by the Department of Social Services until plaintiffs made bail." Plaintiffs signed the surrender document and were issued an appearance ticket." [emphasis added]

During his ~~persecution~~ investigation, Tully made reference to the results of a veterinarian's examination of an allegedly unfit puppy sold by the plaintiffs. Yet the vet's sworn affidavit reads:

"I understand that Mr. Tully has given an updated deposition in this case in which he avers that[I found an animal] infected with a contagious disease dangerous to the life and/or health of animals called coccida. . . I absolutely deny that I ever told Mr. Tully. . . that any of the animals was infected with a contagious disease dangerous to the life and/or health of animals. . .the puppy was normal in all respects and was clearly not "infected with a contagious disease dangerous to the life and/or health of animals." [emphasis added]
Note: to protect the vet's privacy, I have removed some details from the linked affidavit

All charges against the dog owners were dropped.

Hat tip: Game Fowl News

Law. Order. [Private] Police State.

Back in 2008, when Tully was busy promoting his newly established, shelterless SPCA, he was clear on his vision for Schenctady County:

"I guarantee you, there is no point in having an SPCA unless you increase the volume of arrests,” Tully said.'

Good to know. How about the volume of extortions?

But the connection between addressing any "vicious" dogs in Schenectady County and setting Tully's private army loose on the public is a little vague. How is kicking back half the revenue from unlicensed dog tickets to a private army going to help?

State law allows for the immediate impoundment of unlicensed dogs. Is that what folks in Schenectady County are facing? Because the revenue numbers would be impressive.

What public oversight of law enforcement activities, what transparency in government--and private corporations--can there possibly be when it is handed over to a private corporation? What elected public official acting on behalf of the People of Schenectady County will have any influence at all ?

The proposed agreement between the SPCA and the County is specific:

"Except as provided herein, [the Schenectady County SPCA] shall not be subject to any rules and regulations applicable to the employees of the County, and shall fulfill its responsibilities independent of, and without any supervisory control by the County."

What recourse will people have when they get steamrolled by Tully and the SCSPCA? Who can they complain to, if the County has agreed not to get involved ?

Dog owners of Schenectady County, you will be on your own.

Schoharie County and beyond.

According to Tully, the "ultimate end game for [the SCSPCA] is to make sure the SPCA is viable for years to come."

Also good to know.

Tully expects to be filing a similar extortionate suit in Schoharie County soon, and envisions his model being replicated across the State of New York.

From there, who knows?

What you can do

The Schenectady County Legislature meets to consider the "Vicious Dog Control Act of 2011" on Wednesday, November 9 at 7:00 p. m.

Write, phone, and email the legislators. Tell them you fear life in a police state patrolled by a crew of out-of-control volunteers with no responsibility to any elected official whatsoever. The Schenectady County Chairwoman is Judith Dagostino. Start with her.

Schenectady County Legislative Offices
620 State Street
6th Floor
Schenectady, NY 12305
Phone: (518) 388-4280
Fax: (518) 388-4591
email: legislature @ schenectadycounty.com

Corruption: Tully. Schenectady County. Who else?

The proposal is illegal.

Volunteers for private not-for-profits are not public servants.

The government cannot award special privileges to private corporations.

We do not have private armies in this country.

Schenectady County cannot simply set an unsupervised posse loose on its citizens and hope for the best. Or the cheapest.

Something is terribly, terribly wrong here.

Blow that whistle, ring that bell.

We cannot let this happen.

Humane Havens for Dog Slaughterers

2011-09-26T12:24:00.003-04:00

Update on previously published article

Pit Bull Killer Laura Maloney Rakes It In
at Humane Society of the United States

Movin' on up in the world of corporate dog-killing

Pacelle lauds "accomplishments" of exec who cut and ran after Boudreaux' dogs were slaughtered

Dontcha just love it? As ex Louisiana SPCA CEO Laura Maloney wiggles her way ever upward in the world of industrial animal killing "rescue", the bullshit just gets deeper and deeper. When she joined HSUS a year ago as Pacelle's chief of staff, he babbled on . . .

“I’ve worked alongside Laura in Louisiana during the effort to rescue animals following Hurricane Katrina, and in the battle to outlaw cockfighting in the state, and I have seen her excel in all the areas where’s she focused her attentions. We are an enormously complex organization, and I know she’ll help us make it run even better."

Better at what, Wayne? Killing animals?

Maybe setting up her employers for liability in civil suits stemming from her "rescue" activities?

Cause that's what Laura Maloney excels at.

Maloney was in charge when her blood-thirsty employees seized and immediately killed Boudreaux's 57 dogs. She "worked with authorities" to assure they acted on her allegations.

Boudreaux hadn't even been arraigned when Maloney's SPCA killed his dogs. No wonder Wayne Pacelle loves her.

But when the case went to court the charges were promptly dropped. That's a problem, Wayne. That's a big problem.

Birds finally come home to roost:
Lousiana SPCA settles Boudreaux suit

It has been a long, hard road for Floyd Boudreaux, his family, and the animal lovers that supported him and appreciated his dogs.

The undisclosed sum the SPCA will be paying out to Floyd and his family--and man, I hope it is huge--won't bring back the 57 dogs they lost on the evil day of the "humane" raid Maloney orchestrated against them. It can be no compensation for the extermination of a cherished, 100 year-old line of champions. No amount of money can make what that family went through go away.

But it serves as a warning to other private societies-for-the-prevention who think their cute little uniforms and cop-car clone vehicles will shield them from liability when they ~~fuck up~~. . .
uh, ~~indulge in a little mission creep~~. . .

okay let's cut to the chase and make that. . . do what they wanted to do all along and freaking slaughter beautiful animals belonging to innocent people.

Below is Blue Dog's October, 2009 piece on Maloney and her brilliant career. Let's just hope it finally comes to a screeching halt.
____________________________

Exonerated Pit bull breeder Floyd Boudreaux sues Louisiana SPCA

Disgraced SPCA CEO now ASPCA Sr. Vice President

Floyd Boudreaux made headlines last week with news of his suit against the Lousiana SPCA. The SPCA needlessly, wantonly--and apparently, illegally--slaughtered the Boudreaux dogs as fast as it could after the Boudreaux home was raided during a 2005 dogfighting investigation.

You'd think that Laura Maloney, Chief Executive Officer at the LA SPCA when it exterminated each and every one of Floyd's 57 dogs within 24 hours of seizing them would be unemployable. At least unemployable within the "humane" network where the lives of animals are supposed to count for something. Right? Societies for the prevention of cruelty aren't supposed to be in a flaming hurry to kill the dogs they just finished "rescuing."

Are they?

Ooops. Blue Dog's bad. . .

That's exactly what Maloney's LA SPCA did on that black day four years ago when Boudreaux' dogs were seized, and killed, by "humane" agents. Boudreaux was quickly acquitted when his case went to trial. But it was too late for his dogs.

Maloney's LA SPCA had already carried out sentence on his dogs. Boudreaux hadn't even been arraigned when the killings began.

Scurrying to avoid the cold light of day

State trooper Jacob Dickinson, the investigator that testified during the short trial that vindicated the Boudreaux family, said that "he believed the SPCA would house the animals and did not know the dogs would be euthanized."

But a representative from the SPCA testified that no one person at the nonprofit animal welfare group made the decision to kill the animals but that there was a general assumption that the dogs would be euthanized.

Deny, deny, deny. . .

Laura Maloney's Louisiana SPCA is asking us to accept that general assumptions killed 57 healthy, happy dogs as soon as they arrived at the "shelter"?

Are you kidding? What kind of an explanation is that? And how cold can you get?

The stress from losing those dogs, particularly the dog belonging to his 10 year-old grandson, caused Floyd to suffer a heart attack five days after the LA SPCA killed his dogs.

Rewarding ~~major fuck ups~~ general assumptions

So Maloney, and the LA SPCA, asks the world to believe that LA SPCA personnel just took it upon themselves to kill all those dogs, immediately, no questions asked. All in a day's work. What kind of out-of-control crack house does Maloney claim she was running, anyway ? How arrogant can you get?

ASPCA shelters Maloney from the storm

Moving on to the present. . . Maloney's feeling no pain. She's got a nice new job at the ASPCA. Delicately referring to Maloney's "national recognition for managing high-profile dog fighting cases" the ASPCA placed Maloney in charge of various business units including Humane Law Enforcement, Veterinary Forensics, Government Affairs/Legislative Initiatives, Field Services and the New York City Anti-Cruelty Center.

Some gig, huh? ASPCA Veterinary Forensics. Dang.

Lights going out in Georgia

So, was it Maloney that deployed Melinda Merck, the ASPCA Forensic head honcho now partnered up with Norred and Associates and HSUS ? These three private corporations are cutting a swath through the backwoods of Georgia right now -- seizing pit bulls first and asking questions later. Way, way later.

Is Merck acting on Maloney's instructions--or maybe just a general assumption--when she seizes puppies from the homes of innocent people? Does anyone at the ASPCA even care?

Waves of "humane change" don't reach every shore

What happens to all those seized dogs, anyway? Where are the dogs?

Something tells me that news of the great "Las Vegas Humane Sea Change", in which HSUS sort of agreed that dogs seized during fighting investigations don't necessarily need to die, has been slow to trickle down. Plenty of good dogs are dying lonely deaths for no good reason.

After HSUS, Norred, the ASPCA and the news crews blow town, the killing begins.
What responsibility does Merck, Maloney and the ASPCA assume for the fate of those dogs?

None.

Absolutely none.

ASPCA doesn't walk the walk

The ASPCA cannot employ people like Laura Maloney and look dog owners, particularly pit bull owners, in the eye. It is not possible.

Most especially, the ASPCA cannot put people with a history like Laura Maloney's in charge of Melinda Merck and her travelling pit bull confiscation show.

"We are their voice" ???

What a farce.

Puppyless in Suffolk

2011-07-26T08:14:00.001-04:00

Animal Rights Extremist Tool Jon Cooper's Genius Plan
Suffolk County, New York considers ban on retail sales of dogs

Humane puppy-traffickers will be only game in town

So, here's Suffolk County Legislator Jon Cooper's wicked smart strategy:

First: Shut down every single legal, licensed, regulated, inspected pet shop selling dogs in Suffolk County.

Second: Replace them with unlicensed, un-inspected, unregulated "rescues" and "shelters" selling dogs obtained in murky circumstances from "puppy mills" located hundreds and even thousands of miles away.

Third: What if every voter and taxpayer in Suffolk County doesn't want a shelter dog? Maybe someone would prefer a registered purebred for some strange reason, or maybe a puppy, and none of the few besieged hobby/residential breeders within a day's drive of their home have one?  Maybe they don't want to wait a few years until the hobby breeder has a litter.

Go with the Marie Antoinette solution. That one really worked for her.

Fourth: Get the hell out of Dodge.

When frustrated pet lovers inevitably rebel because they can't find a puppy for the kids and turn to illegal, unlicensed, un-inspected, and potentially substandard and abusive sources--like people selling four week-old puppies out of the trunks of cars in supermarket parking lots--it won't be Cooper's problem. He can pretend he never heard of consumer demand.

Who will suffer? Who will benefit?

Want to read the text? Be my guest.

Who will suffer under Cooper's latest version of IR 1545-2011 is obvious: dog owners, pet store owners and their employees,  pet-related businesses such as groomers, feed stores, trainers, dog walkers, boarding kennels, and vets.  And the pets themselves.

But who benefits? That's an interesting question.

Humane puppy-trafficking among the glitterati:
Animal Rescue Fund of the Hamptons

Best Friends Animal Society's latest, most bestest friend is ARF of the Hamptons, a facility unable to find enough local dogs to stay in business, but reports assets and cash on hand in excess of $13 million at year-end 2009.   Yes, some dog rescuers are not exactly cash strapped in Suffolk County's East End, where so much of Jon Cooper's support on IR 1545 comes from:

"Every animal the local animal control can’t adopt, ARF takes in. Still, ARF has to import adoptable animals from other parts of the country to keep its shelters from turning into a ghost town. Many of those animals come from Best Friends’ Pup My Ride, a program that transports dogs from puppy mills in the Midwest to the Northeast. . .

[. . .]We’re never able to get enough of those ["puppy mill"] dogs working locally with our municipal pounds or going into New York,” Michele says. “So when Best Friends approached us about taking in all these small breed dogs, we jumped at the chance.

Once the animals go up for adoption, they go very, very quickly.”

Based on documents submitted to the New York State Charities Bureau, as a 501(c)3, ARF's 22 acre compound located in Wainscott, New York was valued at a little over $5 million in 2009.  The real estate holdings are exempted from property taxes.

ARF's almost $7 million in revenue from donations, investments and other sources in 2009? Not taxable.

The almost $93,000 ARF grossed on dog sales in 2009? Not taxable, either.

All in all, in 2009 -- a freaking tough year for most individuals, businesses and charitable organizations in the United States -- ARF's net worth went from $8,658,848 to $13,336,833.

Not bad. Which brings us to another item in Business Management 101:

Flip that inventory

ARF describes with great pathos the "puppy mill" dogs it obtains under unspecified circumstances at unknown cost. Whether they were seized from their owners, surrendered, or bought at auction, ARF tells a story of dogs that suffered from lack of proper veterinary care, forced over-breeding, psychological trauma and various physical ailments.    They lived crammed into tiny cages, were never walked, were deprived of human contact and didn't know how to play.

Generally speaking and according to ARF, the dogs they bring into the Hamptons are a wreck.

Nevertheless, also according to ARF, upon arrival in Wainscott they get a bath and grooming, and promptly undergo surgical sterilization.  Soon thereafter, an "amazing transformation" occurs which renders them immediately ready and available for life as a pet in the homes of Suffolk County families.

It seems the whole process--from wreck to amazing transformation--usually takes about two weeks. Those small breed "puppymill" dogs just fly off the shelf.

Nice work if you can get it

As a private, not-for-profit corporation, ARF and other Suffolk shelters and rescues are not required to comply with the humane standards of care required of pet stores and non-residential breeders.

New York State does not routinely inspect shelters and rescues as it does pet stores.

New Yorkers who purchase a pet from a shelter or rescue have no recourse under the state's "puppy lemon law" which only covers dogs purchased at pet stores and from other licensed "pet dealers."

And then there are all the tax advantages enjoyed by 501(c)3's.

Seems Cooper's not so pro-choice after all

The latest version of his proposal makes it absolutely illegal for lawfully operated Suffolk County pet stores to sell dogs under one year of age, unless the dogs come from a shelter or rescue.

Shelters and rescues, on the other hand, can continue to sell puppies and dogs without restrictions.

By legislating such a huge competitive advantage in the marketplace to one group of competitors, while denying lawful small business owners the ability to make a living, Suffolk County would be participating in dishonest trade practices.

And Suffolk residents will find it very difficult to find a puppy in the future. Will possession of a young dog become yet another act of conspicuous consumption among the wealthy? Beamer, summer home, havanas, and a puppy, any kind of puppy, to make the picture complete?

Cooper's problem with facts

Cooper's proposal is based on the wildest of internet rumors and animal extremist propaganda.

He profiled every single Suffolk County pet store owner offering dogs to the public as a profiteer furthering the crime of cruelty to animals. As a pit bull-owning gay man, Cooper must know a little something about negative stereotypes, but he flings them around with abandon.

In a public hearing in June, Cooper used the fact that pet store owners often obtain their dogs from kennels located in Missouri to "prove" that their dogs are the product of animal abuse. Although it made national news, he didn't seem to know that Missouri's statutes covering dog breeders are now probably the most stringent in the country.

Crap, he compared the American Kennel Club and its members to "puppy millers."

Is this all too bizarre, or what?

The hand that feeds Jon Cooper

Cooper is a lame duck. After 12 years in the Suffolk County legislature, he is term-limited. He's looking for a new gig. State Senator Carl Marcellino's job is looking mighty tasty, too.

“I will spend whatever it takes to defeat you" ? Really? And whose deep pockets are those bucks going to come from?

What makes me think Cooper's sugar-daddies have no interest in responsible pet ownership?

Keep Suffolk Pet Friendly.

Peter Vallone Jr. Hates New York's Dogs

2011-02-26T19:21:00.000-05:00

Eight Million NYC Residents Face a "Humane" Law They Don't Understand

Sponsor Peter Vallone dodges and weaves

Will the author of NYC 10/2011, possibly the worst written law in the history of the City of New York, please step forward?

Cause you got some 'splaining to do, baby.

Reality is setting in, and the pet and animal owners of New York City are beginning to realize that -- thanks to a handful of radical animal rights whackjobs and extremists -- normal, everyday practices involving the leashing, collaring and humane restraint of animals are now illegal.

Read. The. TEXT.

February 2's blog was devoted to NYC's new and absolute prohibition on walking leashed dogs and other animals while using a "choke" or "pinch" collar. If left standing, could the new law be used to harass participants or even shut down purebred dog shows? Only time, the size of the balls on the ~~animal rights freaks~~ humane law enforcement personnel interpreting the law, and the city's justice system, will tell.

But one thing is absolutely certain: when the law takes effect in early May, NYC dog walkers using a choke or pinch collar -- popular training accessories and standard equipment for many dogs -- will be breaking the law. I'm guessing 99% of city dog owners have no idea that the city ruled on what sort of dog collar they can use. To be honest, I don't think the City Council members themselves realized they did that.

Swivel Trubbel: Peter Vallone Jr. haz it

It is clear that the new law's sponsor doesn't understand the law he introduced. In response to the Dog Federation of New York's criticism that, among many other flaws and failings, 10/2011 does not allow a family at a picnic to tie their dog's leash to a park bench or picnic table while they eat, Vallone issued the kind of embarrassing, food-spraying splutter most politicians would do anything to avoid.

And he lied.

No one listens to the head of that so called federation, even in animal rights circles, and as usual his reading of the bill is all wrong. Of course a family can tie up a dog at a picnic, just not for more than three hours straight. If he would do that, he probably shouldn't be in the animal rights business in the first place. If he has any problem with the bill, he should talk to the legitimate animal rights groups like the ASPCA who helped draft it.

Oh my. My, my, my.

Councilman Vallone is a city councilman, and a former Assistant District Attorney. Surely he knows that when a law says . . .

Any person who. . .leashes an animal. . .to a stationary object outdoors for a permissible period of time shall provide such animal with adequate food, water and shelter, and shall restrain the animal with a device with having swivels at both ends. . .

it means you better be damn sure you've got "a device with swivels at both ends."

Not a normal leash.

This dog is therefore illegally restrained--regardless of how long she's been there. Five minutes or five hours--it makes no difference.

She's also illegally collared.

And I don't see any food, water, or a dog house. That could be a problem for the dog's owner under the new law, too.

Without a caliper, I can't be sure about the thickness of the links of chain on her collar. But since the entire collar is illegal under this ~~gibberish~~ new law anyway, it hardly matters.

Finally, of course this dog appears to be a "pit bull." Peter Vallone Jr. wants her the hell out of the city anyway.

It doesn't matter that the dog is just fine, chomping on her stick and posing for the camera. Not bothering anyone.

This is a crime scene.

Fake Science Rules in NYC

Vallone and his supporters quote claims floating on the Internet that tethering dogs increases aggression, and cite a single, elderly study in which the finding regarding tethered dogs was a tertiary result.

That's it. That's all they've got.

The findings of that one study have never been reproduced.

On the other hand, Dr. Katherine Houpt of Cornell University’s College of Veterinary Medicine Department of Biomedical Sciences is the country’s leading expert on the issue of tethering. Dr. Houpt, who has studied the issue for years, found that tethering does not increase aggression in dogs.

Legitimate Animal Rights Businesses Chip Away at Animal Ownership

Peter Vallone Jr. chastised DFNY and referred them to the ASPCA, an extremist organization which opposes animal ownership. In Vallone-speak the ASPCA is a legitimate animal rights business and it helped draft his law.

Vallone also welcomed the support of PeTA on his law. The folks that donated money to felon, terrorist and convicted arsonist Rodney Coronado are legitimately in the animal rights biz, too.

HSUS's New York lobbyist Patrick Kwan ? The animal advocate who can't tell a hen from a rooster? Also a legitimate animal rightist and supporter of Vallone's law.

It's not personal. This is business. The animal rights business. The legitimate animal rights business in which any restriction on animal ownership is a "win." Any restriction at all.

Vague and arbitrary prohibitions

There is no logic here. No science. All we've got is bombast and attempted career enhancement.

What an embarrassment for the flim-flammed New York City Council. They were used and abused by Peter Vallone Jr., the animal rights extremist flunkey.

What a tragedy for NYC's many, many caring dog and animal owners. They have to comply with this mess -- and trust me, if you think the swivel thing is bad, stay tuned.

Let Hizzoner Mayor Bloomberg know: repeal 10/2011 in its entirety. The sooner, the better.

Animal Rights Extremists Take Manhattan

2011-02-02T15:48:00.007-05:00

New York City Council Backdoors BSL and Screws Responsible Dog Owners

Peter Vallone Jr.'s "humane" triumph in New York City
Heavily restricts humane, responsible containment of dogs

First Casualties of Humane War Against NYC Dog Owners:
Uno the Beagle and Madison Square Garden ?

Makes you wonder how it all came about, doesn't it?

Vallone's career as a pit bull hater

NYC's premier pit bull hater, shoulder to shoulder with the city's most elite animal rights types ?

What's wrong with this picture?

For years, City Councilman Vallone has been an outspoken "pit bull" hater who repeatedly sought to stigmatize pit bull owners as gang-banging lowlife criminals.

When his proposal to ban pit bulls from New York City failed, he teamed up with animal rights extremists.

Why not?

Flash forward to 2011

The ASPCA strongly supported Vallone's Int. 425, a proposal to restrict tethering, along with PeTA, HSUS, the Humane Society of New York and others.

Can anybody say "quid pro quo"?

Int. 425-A united a fear-mongering pit bull hater with the blind ambition of politicians and animal extremists in a perfect storm of anti-animal, anti-animal owner legislation.

More than one way to skin a cat

Following Vallone's pin-headed logic, if he couldn't ban pit bulls outright, he could kick the legs out from under their owners by making their stereotypical nasty practices illegal and drive them out of the city that way.

Except Vallone doesn't know shit about dogs in general, or pit bulls specifically. And he cares even less.

A former Manhattan Assistant DA, son of an ex City Council president and mayoral hopeful, would-be Queens Boro President Peter Vallone Jr. is all about Peter Vallone Jr.

Int-425A had nothing to do with the humane treatment of dogs, and everything to do with his career aspirations.

And his humaniac co-conspirators on Int-425A? Heh. Same comments apply.

Not just pit bulls: blowback takes out unexpected targets

Heralded by Gotham's strident animal rights community as a "huge success for dog welfare" in reality the new law invents an artificial new class of animal cruelty: one that has nothing to do with the condition of any particular animal and the care it receives.

The new law prohibits NYC dog owners from humanely and responsibly containing their dogs by proper tethering and creates substantial penalties for those who do, even if their dogs are perfectly well-cared for and healthy. All that matters in NYC is the amount of time elapsed.

NYC's new law offers no solutions and zero support for struggling owners who cannot restrain their dogs by other means. Especially in NYC, quality, dog-proof fencing is expensive and very often prohibited by zoning and/or landlord restrictions.

Dogs previously contained by proper tethering may well wind up in the hands of New York City's Animal Care and Control -- where the chances are pretty good they will sicken and die.

But Vallone's proposal wasn't just about tethering. Nope.

Hasty amendments on the down-low

On the very morning of January 18, Int. 425 was heard in committee, it was amended and passed by the NYC Council's Committee on Health.

That same afternoon, the City Council voted to enact the amended version. The ink on the amendments was hardly dry.

Apparently the group of know-nothings that put the amendments together consulted each other, and no one else. They made a couple of teensy blunders. . .

Artificial crimes lead to unwitting perps.

Uno the Westminster Best in Show ~~Beagle~~ Pit Bull

The collar Uno so graciously models above?

The ones worn by virtually every dog exhibited at the world's most celebrated dog show, the Westminster Kennel Club show at Madison Square Garden?

The dog show that brings in tourists, exhibitors and camera crews to New York City from across the country and around the world?

Well, Uno's collar is now illegal in New York City. Uno just became an honorary "pit bull."

I guess his owners are now honorary criminal gangbanging lowlifes. Welcome to the club.

ASPCA "humane law enforcement officers" swarming Westminster?

So, will spectators at Madison Square Garden be treated to the sight of an ASPCA raid? With something like 2500 entrants at Westminster, virtually all wearing ~~dogfighting paraphernalia~~ . . .um ~~nasty pit bull equipment~~ . . .uh ~~show dog collars~~ no, no make that "prohibited choke collars" it would sure make for a great episode on Animal Planet. Imagine the royalties.

Go west, kennel club. Go west.

To the Members of the Board of the Westminster Kennel Club: take your show to New Jersey. Please.

The Meadowlands would welcome you with open arms.

And the parking is way cheaper.

It's clear that New York City doesn't want you, doesn't value the millions of dollars you bring to the local economy each year and all the positive publicity you generate.

The City Council considers your practices abusive.

Its time to blow that fire trap, and leave the explanations to Peter Vallone Jr. and the ASPCA.

I'm thinking Mayor Bloomberg, the rest of the City Council -- not to mention the owners of Madison Square Garden and other NYC businesses that will miss Westminster -- are going to be interested in hearing them.

ASPCA Hires Dogfighter

2010-12-21T20:18:00.006-05:00

while $50,000 Buys an HSUS Make-over for Michael Vick.

It's coming on Christmas, but we're gonna get nothing but moral turpitude from "humane" animal extremist flagships like HSUS and ASPCA.

The ASPCA Proudly Welcomes Confessed Animal Abuser

Terry Mills, diplomatically described as an "animal fighting specialist" in the ASPCA's press release, was recently hired by the private, non-profit corporation to "collaborate" with publicly-employed law enforcement personnel and "spearhead" dog and cockfighting investigations conducted at public expense.

With a mission to supplant the function of public servants who ultimately are responsible to the tax-payers controlling their jobs, Mills' function runs parallel to that of the ASPCA's fraudulent forensic animal "expert" and puppy thief, Melinda Merck.

Mills will be "training" law enforcement personnel, and public funds will cover the cost.

Terry Mills had retired after 30 years with the Missouri State Highway Patrol when the ASPCA picked up his contract. According to the ASPCA, Mills' prime qualification was an 18 month stint "as an undercover officer, gaining access to the underground world of organized dog fighting and collecting extensive evidence."

But let's take a closer look at what Mills really did during his 18 months of "collecting extensive evidence."

ASPCA blows off felony animal cruelty

Mills had way, way more than mere "access."

By his own admission, to further his work he acquired 40 American Pit Bull Terrier dogs, and about a dozen puppies. He conditioned them for the purposes of fighting, trained them for the purpose of fighting, and transported them to fight venues.

He deliberately -- and call me crazy, but I believe this was malicious -- fought them.

A number of Mills' dogs died as a result of the injuries they sustained in the fights Mills arranged.

Mills abandoned the surviving dogs when the investigation concluded.

How "humane."

Funny how the ASPCA didn't mention any of this.

Do the ends justify the means?

Maybe. If the "ends" are career enhancement and a certain amount of personal glory.

In 2009 the various personalities involved in "dogfighting for the greater good" --Terry Mills, his partner Jeff Heath, the ASPCA's Tim Rickey, and Kyle Held of the Humane Society of Missouri -- were all named the ASPCA's Law Enforcement Officers of the Year.

Do I hear a "woo-hoo!" out there? No?

One of Mills' prime cohorts in the humane dogfight ring, Tim Rickey, left the Humane Society of Missouri to become the ASPCA's senior director of field investigations and response. He'll join fellow immoral "humane champions" Melinda Merck and Chris Schindler, the bastard who agreed in court testimony that unweaned pit bull puppies are "too dangerous" to live.

And Mills just got himself hired by the ASPCA.

These people are in like Flynn -- rolling in the clover.

Laura Maloney, ASPCA alumnus and veteran pit bull killer, already moved on to the HSUS. Greener pastures, dontcha know?

The $50,000 Price-tag for the Redemption of Michael Vick

O, Wayne, where art thou?

Vick and his humaniac controllers put down $50,000 cash money for the purpose of cleansing Vick's ~~soul~~ reputation.

And Wayne Pacelle and HSUS snatched it up.

No questions asked.

Pacelle, who lost no time in using Michael Vick's infamy as a factory fundraising tool, all the while calling for the death of Vick's dogs, now claims that Vick would "do a good job" as a pet owner.

So how come Vick's not feeling the love ?

Outrage on the internet

Facebook is in flames. People just aren't happy with the thought of Vick-as-responsible-dog-owner. Nope. Not at all. No amount of "social networking management" is gonna make this go away.

Could it be the pet-loving American public won't be manipulated quite as easily as HSUS and its spin doctors thought?

Are people finally, finally, sickened by all the killing in the farcical name of the "humane" treatment of animals? Anybody else have a problem with "humane" dogfighting rings? Cause I sure do.

Will potential donors sidestep that vast sea of holiday-themed "Donate NOW!" bullshit? Will they avoid getting sucked into ethically bankrupt fundraising campaigns?

I sure hope so.

ASPCA's Melinda Merck Checks in at Smackdown Hotel

2010-12-14T09:22:00.006-05:00

Forensic Puppy Thief
No Damn Expert

Florida Circuit Judge Kicks Merck to the Curb

Blue Dog State readers will remember the key role Merck played in the shameful seizure of Joe Woodall's dogs.

Merck okayed the impoundment of Woodall's healthy, happy dogs for "evaluation on suspicion of dogfighting."

The dogs were dumped in a county animal control facility 250 miles from Woodall's home. No "evaluation" was ever conducted. Merck and the rest of the animal extremist private army that raided Joe Woodall never looked back.

It took Joe eight weeks, and more than he could afford in attorney's fees, to secure the return of his dogs. Woodall was never charged with a crime, but his life changed forever.

Cats and "professional", "serial" cat killers

Leveraging her "forensic" credentials as she ascends the animal extremist hierarchy, Merck continues to play a critical role in the seizure of animals on suspicion of heinous crimes and sending unknown quantities of dogs to their deaths based on her "expert" opinion that they were used in dogfighting.

You can fool some of the people all of the time. . .

In Miami-Dade, coverage of the "serial cat killer" responsible for the "surgical evisceration" of 19 pets alternately thrilled and terrorized South Florida residents for months as a young man faced allegations of criminally depraved behavior. The Discovery Channel just couldn't get enough of the story.

18-year-old Tyler Weinman endured house arrest, an electronic monitoring device, court-ordered psychiatric evaluations, and heavy bond requirements. He received death threats, and he faced 158 years in prison if convicted.

As the country's foremost "forensic animal expert" Merck told authorities that in her opinion the dead cats had been cruelly sliced apart with sharp instrument, presenting in a stereotypically deviant way. The ASPCA's other "authority", Randall Lockwood, added a little more fuel to the twisted fire, as he explained that . . .

. . .cruelty toward cats, as opposed to other animals, can fulfill a deeper need for control. Cats, unlike dogs, can be more difficult to control. They don't come when they're called and are often more independent (said Dr. Randall Lockwood of The American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals and author of "Forensic Investigation of Animal Cruelty").

Things just couldn't have been sicker, according to the ASPCA.

Except the charges against Tyler Weinman quickly fell to pieces. An expert brought in by the defense to examine the cat remains peeled back the fur on the corpses, and found bite marks. Not scalpel marks.

Instead of a demented cat-hating psycho on the loose, the cats were killed by the usual suspects: animal predators. "Forensic expert" Merck was forced to change her interpretation of the evidence and agree with the defense's witness.

Charges against the defendant were quickly dropped.

Judge fed up with imaginary serial cat killers and phantom dog rapists

Only two weeks later, in considering the Armand Pacher dog-sexploitation charges, Judge Trawick was outspoken in his rejection of Merck's expertise:

"She doesn't have any credibility with me right now," Circuit Judge Daryl Trawick warned a prosecutor during a pretrial hearing. . . If you're going to rely upon her, she's going to have to come to this courtroom and testify. . .I will judge her credibility based upon what I see from the witness stand."

Pacher, a retired business executive in poor health and with no prior criminal record, made an off-colored joke when he brought his Great Dane in to a University of Florida veterinary clinic.

Pacher's stupid joke about having sex with his dog triggered (what else?) a forensic investigation by Melinda Merck. His attorney described a police raid "in full tactical gear and armed with automatic weapons, ransacking the high-rise condo and seizing "dog leashes, collars, grooming tools, as well as computers, files, photos, documents, videos and virtually everything else that could be physically removed from the defendant's apartment.''

The cops based themselves on Melinda Merck's examination of the dog and her findings of vaginitis, human sperm and other indications of sexual abuse. Merck provided police with an affidavit supporting the search and the seizure of Pacher's computer and other personal items because "this type of sexually deviant behavior has a definite voyeuristic component.''

Sounds pretty bad, doesn't it? Except the cops didn't find any perverted, weird crap in Pacher's home. The only "evidence" against him was Merck's examination of the dog. And guess what?

The four board certified theriologists who reviewed Merck's test results, and the conclusions she drew, disagreed with her. Majorly. Nearly violently.

In fact, Dr. Bruce Elits of Louisiana State University concluded that Merck "made false statements in this report in order to exaggerate the true facts."

Charges against 65 year-old Armand Pacher were also promptly dropped.

Attention media hounds and ASPCA watchers: Watch for civil law suits from both Pacher and Weinman. The various instigators of the destruction of their lives may not have heard the last of them yet.

Peers review the ASPCA's forensic head honcho

In evaluating Melinda Merck's work on the Pacher case, other experts in animal reproduction were not impressed either:

Dr. G. Reed Holyoak of Oklahoma State University:  "It would appear, in the end, there was no sperm where they thought sperm had been and what they thought was sperm was probably something else.''

Dr. Hannah Glanlantino-Homer of the University of Pennsylvania:  "I have found nothing in any of these records that supports Dr. Merck's repeated assertions that [Pacher's dog] 'Christie' suffered from sexual abuse by her owner.''

Miami veterinarian Dr. Ray George Bailey:  "[W]ith the total lack of any supporting evidence from the start, making these type of accusations, taking Mr. Pacher's dog away for months, arresting Mr. Pacher, newspaper and Internet articles about his arrest, defamation of his character, not to mention legal expense, is all just wrong.''

When "animal CSI" goes wrong. . .way wrong

Dr. Patty Khuly, vet and writer of the popular veterinary blog, PetMd. writes:

In a stunning breach of ethics and/or competence, self-styled "animal CSI" expert, Dr. Melinda Merck (of the ASPCA) either misled the courts for the purpose of advancing her personal/professional agenda, or she displayed shocking incompetence in the field she pioneered and through which she rose to prominence.

and it just keeps getting better. . .

Merck runs Univ. of Florida's Veterinary Forensic Training Program

She's "training" more "animal CSI" "experts." With a $300,000 stake from the ASPCA Merck co-founded UF's "Animal CSI" program in 2009.

The whole corrupt idea is that privately-employed individuals should be "training" employees of other private corporations (SPCA's and "humane societies") in the enforcement of laws which govern all of us.

Merck, the employee of a private corporation with no responsibilities other than to the board of directors of that private corporation, influenced the issuance of search warrants and the prosecution of two individuals in Florida for crimes that, apparently, are figments of her own sick (really sick) imagination.

Or her blind ambition. Or God complex. Whatever.

Florida Circuit Court Judge Daryl Trawick has her number. Merck is, literally, incredible. I just hope the judges and prosecutors in other cases Merck instigated are paying attention.

Humane Double Standards: NFP's and everybody else

2010-07-12T20:15:00.005-04:00

What's IRS tax filing status got to do with animal care and expertise?

That's what I want to know.

As fallout from the Death of Oreo's Law continues, and pet lovers spot abundant hypocrisy in responses from a certain Oreo's Law proponent . . .

Why aren't "animal rescue organizations" clamoring to be inspected for compliance with the minimum standards of care so often required of dastardly "breeders"?

Aren't they supposed to be the shining examples?

Apparently not.

Nonprofit Doesn't Mean "Good"

It doesn't mean "humane."

It doesn't mean ethical.

Looks like it doesn't mean competent, either:

People thought he was so cute and everyone wanted to adopt him. Three of them even tried and returned him the next day. We told people it would take at least two weeks before he stopped trying to bite you, but …still, he came back, all full of himself, and almost…proud that he outlasted another one. Giggle. We couldn’t stand it, it was so funny and so cute and he was such a holy terror.

"Giggle." ??? How clueless can you get?

Blue Dog's Modest Proposal

Not long ago, Blue Dog State answered an honest question, which later morphed into last week's blog on the merciful death of Oreo's Law and the humane food fight that rapidly ensued.

In response to Yes Biscuit's request for "criteria or guidelines . . .to be sure that rescue is a reasonable place to send the animals" Blue Dog suggested. . .

501(c)3 “rescue” organizations should be designated “pet dealers” under NYS law, subject to the same scrutiny, the same inspection for conformity to the same minimum standards of care as other pet dealers operating in the state of New York.

Support for the suggestion was. . . well . . . mixed. At least in that forum.

Some felt that my modest proposal would mean the end to foster homes, but I believe that issue is readily fixable.

On the other hand, I'm not too big on double standards.

I don't see why NFP status should provide a shield from inspection and regulation

As far as I'm concerned, it is either appropriate and necessary to regulate facilities selling animals in volume. . .or it is not.

So, let's give it another shot:

Take the dang Poll!

Note that Blue Dog's Modest Proposal assumes the presence of regulations governing commercial kennels or pet dealers which typically exempt smaller "hobby-type" facilities.

Also, you may have to hit the lefthand "submit query" in order to vote. The righthand "submit query" leads me to the poll results. Go figure.

What say you all?

Oreo's Law Smackdown

2010-07-05T18:21:00.014-04:00

Winograd vs. ASPCA vs. Best Friends vs. Pets Alive vs. Animal Law Coalition vs. Mayor's Alliance vs. . . .

Tantrums! Deceit! Megalomania!

And the needs of the People of the State of New York? Did anybody even ask?

Oreo's Law goes down in flames in Albany

In mid-June, despite a last ditch effort by Oreo's Law proponents across the country to push the bill forward, the New York State Assembly Committee on Agriculture wasted little time in moving to table the controversial proposal. Oreo's Law makes the transfer of shelter dogs or cats scheduled for euthanasia to any 501(c)3 that wants them mandatory and a matter of state law.

Tabling a young proposal is not unusual in New York, where successful bills typically spend six years in committee, under discussion and being refined, before passing into law. New York isn't California. It's not Utah, either.

Oreo's Law (A9449/S6412) was first introduced in the state legislature in January, 2010. It was amended four times in five weeks. Legislators might have wanted the ink to dry, maybe consult with their actual constituents, before making a decision. I dunno. It's just a thought.

Vengeance is Mine

Oreo's Law died in committee. The shit storm commenced the day before, with Pets Alive's co-Executive Director, Matt DeAngelis leading the charge:

Let’s show [New York legislators] that in the end the PEOPLE of New York decide the POLICIES of New York, not some power hungry elitists with our money spilling out of their pockets.

I, Matt DeAngelis, promise that should [Assembly Agriculture Committee Chair] Mr. Magee table this bill I will personally pour my own personal time, energy and money into ensuring he is defeated this November, WHEN HE IS UP FOR RE-ELECTION.

Oh, brother. So, it's okay for DeAngelis to pour his money into New York politics, but not for his opponents to do likewise?

Pets Alive's co-executive director says he speaks for the "PEOPLE of New York" . . .but he lives in Connecticut. DeAngelis doesn't want to live in New York, and legislators please note, he thinks the New York government is "insane."

Pets Alive is forming a Political Action Committee, which of course is a tool for influencing legislation and legislators based in large part on financial contributions, but Matt has a problem with "power hungry elitists" spending their money in a similar way?

This is all so confusing.

DeAngelis took a swing at Best Friends Animal Society, too. On June 29 the Connecticut resident blogged:

Best Friends never really understood New York and New Yorkers. This ain’t some rinky dink little town in Utah. If you want our money you need to actually get off the fence and take a stand. We’re tough and we’re smart. You don’t get a pass because you’re Best Friends, and you can’t spin your way out of your mistakes. We bent over backwards on Oreo’s Law to meet demands we thought were frankly, ridiculous. And then you reneged on your promise to support Oreo’s Law and went silent. You’re getting called on it now. If you want to keep spinning instead of doing the right thing and admitting your mistake and supporting the right side of this, you do so at your own peril. You might want to save the civility card for Best Friends Europe.

But four days later, Best Friends was Pets Alive's best friend in the whole wide world:

Thank you to Best Friends Animal Society for being our best friends. . .

Winograd: "~~God~~ History ~~will absolve~~ is on our side"

It wasn't only Pets Alive and Matt DeAngelis venting their rage on the internet. All kinds of dirty laundry is still swinging in the breeze.

Soon after the bill was introduced in Albany, Nathan Winograd of the No Kill Advocacy Center in Oakland, California was deeply involved in negotiating its terms with the ASPCA and using Best Friends Animal Society of Utah as an intermediary. In his January letter to the Ed Sayres, Winograd makes a number of offers in an effort to garner their support for his proposal.

The ASPCA and Sayres apparently rejected them all.

After the bill was tabled in the state legislature, in a scathing and likely defamatory series of blogs Winograd calls Sayres . . .

a bad, small-minded and hard-hearted individual. . . .[who] has defended killing and killers throughout the nation, providing them political cover which allows them to remain in their positions and kill even more. . . . . Time and time again, [Sayres] has misappropriated donor funds given to save animals to promote their killing instead. . . .

Best Friends Animal Society didn't fair much better. Winograd blogs that. . .

Best Friends not only took an indefensible position of neutrality on Oreo’s Law, abandoning the rescue groups and animals who made them who they are, but also tried to get Animal Ark and Animal Wise Radio to withdraw their support for this lifesaving legislation . . . .Their contradictory responses have been a bitter disappointment. . .No self reflection. No thoughtfulness. No truth. All politics. . . .[Best Friends] lashed out, lied to cover their behinds, and in doing so, proved me right.

Micah Kellner: Whose elected official is he, anyway?

In the June 20 interview Oreo's Law sponsor Assemblyman Kellner did with AnimalWise Radio (interview begins at 1:09 mark), Kellner tells the tale of how his colleagues in the NYS legislature failed to "stand up for animals."

He describes how Nathan Winograd helped him draft the proposal, and how Deborah Bresch--the ASPCA's Albany lobbyist--lied to him about whether the ASPCA was secretly working to rally opposition. Kellner and the show's host discuss how Best Friends (of Utah) "aggressively" lobbied Animal Wise (of Minnesota) to withdraw their support.

Kellner lists Oreo's Law's biggest supporters as: the No Kill Advocacy Center (of California), Taimie Bryant (the UCLA animal rights law professor who wrote California's Hayden law), and "rescues from across the country."

No mention of his Manhattan constituency, by the way.

Kellner then goes on to explain that it isn't all bad news:  he was able to block the ASPCA's access to funding from increased intact/neutered license fee differentials anticipated in NY City.

Worth noting: Maddies Fund contributed $24.4 million over the last five years to fund low cost spay-neuter efforts in NYC.  The ASPCA apparently claims to perform an additional 30,000 surgeries there.

Like radio host Mike Fry comments, how much more money do they need?   There are fewer than 30,000 licensed dogs in the City of New York, and with a neutering rate of roughly 80% among "responsible" dog owners, how much money does Kellner imagine an increased surcharge will raise?

The future of "No Kill":  Special interests, PAC's and more backroom wheeling and dealing?

Enacting a law, any law, isn't a pretty process. But this is not normal.

Pets Alive's Matt DeAngelis feels the need to shut up those who dare voice concerns with a weird mix of defensiveness, bravado and ego-centric, testosterone-infused internet posts:

I’ve been following your defense of the ASPCA and Best Friends all over the place.

You are dangerous in that you are giving people half the facts, and are totally missing the point. . . .And we are going to get Oreo’s Law passed without the ASPCA and with or without Best Friends. The only thing that seems to be in the way are well-meaning but sadly misinformed people like you. . . .Before you even ASK me about my credentials, go through the Pets Alive website. I’d put my credentials up against anyone else in this fight.

Oh, my.

Nathan Winograd made a terrible blunder in pushing Oreo's Law as hard as he did, and using Pets Alive to do it. And stuff like this:

Read Dr. Martin Luther King’s Letter from a Birmingham Jail. Think of the animals being killed when you do rather than African Americans being denied civil rights.

Not helpful at all.

Sometimes, boys, ya just gotta step away from the computer.

Gone, baby. Gone.

I'm a pit bull owner. There is nothing I want more than for "pit bulls" and other healthy, happy dogs to survive their shelter experiences. I agree that shelter management, not their customers and definitely not the dogs themselves, is responsible for the slaughter.

But what we are witnessing is not democracy in action. It's a freaking carnival ride.

No one made a fact-based case for Oreo's Law.

No one knows what it would do, although the evidence is clear that 501(c)3 status doesn't have anything to do with the proper care and management of animals.

Instead, Oreo's Law proponents are trying to cram it down the throats of 19 million New Yorkers based on emotion and a single incident involving one, very troubled dog.

My faith in Winograd's judgment--and maybe his sanity--is gone. This isn't animal advocacy. It's ego and obstinacy.

Is this where "no kill" is headed?

- - - - -

Comments: Something is going on with Blogger, and some comments are not posting. They are not lost, and hopefully the dancing chimpanzees will fix the problem any minute now. Until that happens, missing comments will be posted here--within the blog text itself.

Forensic Persecution: Latest ASPCA Growth Opportunity

2010-06-21T19:32:00.009-04:00

Dogfight DNA Database:

Using "science" to kill dogs and profile dog owners

The "humane" war against pit bulls and their owners has raged for 30 years or more and continues to kill defenseless dogs belonging to persons who have not yet gone to trial. It continues to fill the coffers of corporate "humane" killing machines"

Playing to the audience, and their wallets

But you knew all that. The scourge of ~~pit bulls and their pesky owners~~ dogfighting has to be the most ~~reliable source of revenue ever identified and exploited~~ dangerous and ever-growing crisis ever combated by HSUS, the ASPCA and their various toadies.

But whoring out the field of genetic research in order to more efficiently ruin dog breeders, destroy their families and kill their dogs?

How low can you go?

The ethics of building a genetic law enforcement database

It seems that for the last 18 months the ASPCA has been collecting DNA samples from dogs seized during "dog-fighting investigations (sic)" and from "suspected (sic) dog-fight venues."

So the pit bull genes in the database are guilty until proven innocent. Which sounds about right, coming from Agent Orange.

But here's the thing: The ASPCA is a private corporation with limited law enforcement authority ONLY within the City of New York. Its employees are not public servants. Did the ASPCA obtain the consent of the dog owners involved before genetic samples were taken ? If not, who authorized the sampling?

Did they steal the genetic material?

ASPCA watches CSI Miami, too

Melinda Merck, the ASPCA's forensic head honcho, says that "juries expect forensic science to support the evidence that's presented to them, and animal cruelty cases are no exception. This database breaks new ground in supplying that evidence for dog fighting investigations. . . ."

But Merck is a liar.

An established genetic relationship between two dogs is evidence of an established genetic relationship between two dogs. Not dogfighting.

Hint: Every single American Pit Bull Terrier on the planet has an established genetic relationship with fighting dogs. Every last one of them. Every APBT breeder on the planet breeds dogs with a "genetic relationship" with fighting dogs. Every trainer trains them, and every APBT owner owns them.

Until 50 years ago, or less depending on the state, dogfighting was a legal activity.

Get where I'm going with this?

In the never-ending debate, and faked pedigrees, and loaded litters, and bullshit about "fighting lines" and "game bred" dogs and which dogs go back to which, there is one thing that is certain: there are plenty of people with happy, healthy pets that share a lot of genetic material with "fighting dogs."

And somebody, somewhere, bred them.

The DNA database is evidence of nothing. It's a frame up. A fake. A money-grubbing farce. And an insult to the general public's intelligence and sense of justice.

"Establishing connections" in order to kill dogs

In its press release, Merck and the ASPCA claimed that. . .

"DNA analysis and matching through the database will help law enforcement agencies to identify relationships between dogs, enabling investigators to establish connections between breeders, trainers, and dog-fight operators."

Tim Rickey, who came to the ASPCA from the Humane Society of Missouri (and HSMO is a DNA Database partner) blew right by the ethical issues:

"This will be an important tool. They can tie animals back to one or more convicted dogfighters and show they're from the same bloodline. It's a solid piece of evidence in a criminal case."

Exactly. If your dog goes back to fighting dogs, you're going to jail and your dog has to die. The database "proves" it.

Its all so simple. And Tim Rickey should know.

Keep your eye on the bouncing ball

Rickey is a "graduate" of the National Cruelty Investigations School -- a 5 day program costing $600 - $650 (10% early bird discount!) -- run under the auspices of the University of Missouri and established in partnership with. . .wait for it. . .

the Humane Society of the United States.

Rickey may even have been taught by HSUS "experts."

Under the new partnership, HSUS experts on animal cruelty will teach some of the classes. This partnership is part of The HSUS’ Humane Society University, which provides professional development opportunities

Feeling better yet?

No?

Hopping aboard the Dogfight DNA Gravy Train

It's not just Merck and the ASPCA lining up to kill dogs based on cheek swab results.

In addition to Missouri Humane, there's the Louisiana SPCA -- the very people that killed Floyd Boudreaux' pit bulls on arrival at the shelter, and tried to brush off the slaughter as "an assumption."

And the Veterinary Genetics Laboratory at the University of California at Davis.

They've all partnered up with Merck and the ASPCA. They all want a piece of that sweet, sweet CSI Humaniac pie.

U C Davis: All dressed up and ready to party

Like the ASPCA, LASPCA and HSMO, Davis has its hand out, too. Its not just the "humane community" that uses dogfighting as a fundraiser.

Persistent concerns from civil rights-minded advocacy groups about racial profiling and genetic privacy?

Calls for "ethically rigorous and practical guidance for investigators and research ethics boards"? Not a U C Davis Veterinary Genetics Laboratory problem.

Davis apparently sees no conflict in genetically profiling dogs which will almost certainly be exterminated as a result, participating in the misuse of genetic research in a pathetic and desperate attempt to convict dog owners of felonies, their joined-at-the-hip partnership with the extremist animal rights ASPCA, and their mission as veterinarians.

When public universities ally themselves with private corporations in order to make money, kill dogs and send people to jail, I've got a problem with that.

U C Davis' School of Veterinary Medicine has a Dean, and an advisory council.

Could they all be okay with prostituting the University of California at Davis?

Let's find out.

________________________

June 22 post script:

Blue Dog State is hearing from APBT owners and breeders that previously used U C Davis to screen for genetic illnesses. They fear DNA from their animals was used in the "dogfight" database.

I encourage any dog owner, and especially any "pit bull" owner that used Davis for genetic testing, to contact the Dean and his advisors and express your concerns in a frank and uninhibited manner. Be sure to mention that the DNA in their database appears to have been stolen, placing them in receipt of stolen property. U C Davis could (and should) be sued.

See link above for contact info, or for phone calls, faxes and snail mail:

Dean Bennie I. Osburn
University of California
One Shields Avenue
Davis, CA 95616
Phone: (530)-752-1360 FAX: (530) 752-2801
Manager: Linda Ybarra

Executive Associate Dean - Academic Programs: John R. Pascoe
Manager: Erin Seay Phone: (530) 752-1324 FAX: (530) 752-2801

Associate Dean - Academic Programs: Jan E. Ilkiw
Manager: Erin Seay Phone: (530) 752-1324 FAX: (530) 752-2801

Associate Dean - Clinical Programs: David Wilson
Manager: Bill Herthel Phone: (530) 752-2992 FAX: (530) 752-9620

Associate Dean - Student Programs: Rance LeFebvre
Manager: Yasmin Williams Phone: (530) 752-1383 FAX: (530) 752-8315

Associate Dean - Research and Graduate Education: Kent C. Lloyd
Manager: Juanita Humphrey Phone: (530) 752-6865 FAX: (530) 752-2801

Assistant Dean - Research Development: Juanita C. Humphrey
Phone: (530) 752-6865 FAX: (530) 752-2801

Associate Dean - Public Programs: Donald J. Klingborg
Manager: Jan McCarthy Phone: (530) 752-6895 FAX: (530) 752-7563

Assistant Dean - Administration: Doreen E. Franke
Manager: Kathleen Spurr Phone: (530) 752-1370 FAX: (530) 752-2801

Assistant Dean - Development: Kelly J. Nimtz
Manager: Willa Weiand Phone: (530) 752-6261 FAX: (530) 754-8774

Be sure to communicate with the referring vet you used, and feel free to post a copy of any correspondance here.

Way to go, Davis. Partnering up with the ASPCA is a wonderful way to encourage confidence in your clients. Not.

In Defense of Animals Crowns Scotlund Haisley

2010-06-08T07:54:00.004-04:00

HSUS and Wayne Pacelle's Cowboy Scot
Now IDA's President Cowboy Scotlund

So get with the program, pet lovers.

No bad deed goes unrewarded. Not in the mixed up, muddled up, shook up world of animal rights extremism.

Convincing people to rescue and adopt

According to former President and current COB Eliot Katz, In Defense of Animals is all about the need to ". . .convince people to rescue and adopt instead of buying or selling animals, [and] to disavow the language and concept of animal ownership."

IDA's Katz is unequivocal: "It is time we demand an end to the misguided and abusive concept of animal ownership. The first step on this long, but just, road would be ending the concept of pet ownership."

And now IDA has Scotlund Haisley as its enforcer-in-chief.

Adrenalin junkies: ~~playing SWAT~~ or "convincing" the public and "convincing" sick, old dogs?

HumaneWatch.org's summary of the leadership role Scotlund Haisley and HSUS played in the illegal the seizure of 172 dogs belonging to a South Dakota dog breeder paints a vivid picture of what "convincing" entails in Cowboy Scot-speak.

A South Dakota judge ordered the dogs that somehow survived Haisley's "rescue" effort returned to their owner, who is still struggling to regain custody of his dogs and reassemble the pieces of his life.

Before the South Dakota debacle, there was HSUS's muscle-bound raid, led by Haisley, on the shelter Norman Pang operated for six days in Oahu.

Pang struggled to administer to the needs of animals in a hospice his wife operated before her death, but made the mistake of turning to the "humane" community for assistance.

Instead of help, Pang and the animals got Scotlund Haisley and his crew, who quickly labeled Pang a "murderer", "hoarder" and "collector."

All because, following his wife's death, Pang realized he was out of his depth and immediately asked for help.

Pang brought a civil rights lawsuit against HSUS, its Hawaiian Humane Society toady and others involved in the travesty.

IDA rolls out the welcome mat

In his press released welcome note to Haisley, Katz managed to delicately underscore the testosterone component: "Scotlund Haisley has been a dynamic force in the animal protection world . . .[and he will] maximize IDA's efforts to become a more powerful voice and force. . . ."

Dynamic forces and powerful voices?

Or did an organization claiming to exist for the "defense" of animals just hire an unemployed cowboy whose out-of-control and legally questionable behavior made his position at HSUS untenable?

What kind of word games are these people playing?

It's all about the animals. [Not.]

Frequently cited, rarely clarified -- and often thoughtlessly uttered -- this statement needs translation. What it really means is:

The ends justify the means.

We'll do anything we want, and we think we won't be questioned.

We operate in plain view because we are so intoxicated by our own audacity that we think no one will question our authority, our motives, and our agenda.

We say anything we want, offer any explanation handy. We own the media. We own the legislature.

We're above the law.

It's "all about the animals." Right?

uh. . .right?

Whole 'nother posse saddling up

and Blue Dog is just loving it.

This stuff with the billboards and newspaper ads and Facebook? It leaves a mark, and Wayne Pacelle knows it. HSUS ditched Scotlund Haisley when he became too great a liability.

Let's just hope John Goodwin and Chris Schindler are next.

As for IDA? They'd better keep their insurance premiums paid up.

heh.

Souring "No Kill" in New York

2010-04-20T08:16:00.005-04:00

Animal Extremist Flagship Scrambles for Cover. . .

. . .as Nathan Winograd puts the screws to the ASPCA, the NYS Legislature mulls "Oreo's Law" and Pets Alive still hasn't filed mandatory tax forms with the NYS Charities Bureau.

The curtain is about to go up on The Clash of the Titans, Act II. So make yourself some popcorn.

And grab a box of tissues, if you're not okay with a lot of political posturing at the expense of defenseless animals used as pawns in the this "humane" brinksmanship extravaganza.

Barbarians at Ed Sayres' gate: animal extremists protest at ASPCA

These are not days of wine and roses at E. 92nd Street, and it just gets worse for Agent Orange -- the "voice of the voiceless" -- as things spiral downward.

Meanwhile, at the state capital. . .

ASPCA's not the only one hearing voices

Invoking the name of a dog ~~tormented by a criminal then rescued~~ tormented by a criminal, exploited for her fund-raising potential, and finally killed by the ASPCA, agents for the "humane" treatment of animals are administering their own litmus test in Albany: "Oreo's Law" -- For or Against?

The proposal makes the transfer of shelter animals scheduled for euthanasia to another shelter or rescue that wants them mandatory and a matter of state law. Amended four times since it was first introduced in January, "Oreo's Law" appears to be slowly strangling in its own red-tape, procedural requirements and specifications.

Why would non-profits operating lawfully in the State of New York invite government involvement in what was their private, lawful business, anyway?

Oreo's unintended consequences

Here are a few questions for New York's elected public officials:

What if the "NONPROFIT, AS DEFINED IN SECTION 501(C)(3) OF THE INTERNAL REVENUE CODE ANIMAL RESCUE OR ADOPTION ORGANIZATION" is fiscally irresponsible and has no competence whatsoever with dogs like Oreo, that -- for whatever reason and with an unknown capacity for improvement -- keep trying to bite people?

What connection is there between an organization's tax reporting status and its ability to manage problematic dogs?

Doesn't the mandate of elected officials include protecting the safety and welfare of the People of the State of New York from the blunders of outfits like Pets Alive?

What mechanism exists to protect the welfare of animals in the custody of those "adoption organizations"? They are exempted from humane standards of care requirements made of similar facilities with a differing tax-filing status, and are not routinely inspected by the State of New York. Dogs with temperament issues could spend a lifetime sequestered at a private "adoption organization." Who's going to check on them?

Will all of those tax-exempt "adoption organizations" stand up to public scrutiny?

Pets Alive: Still crazy. After all these years.

Pets Alive of Middletown, New York, occasionally known as "Best Friends, East Coast Division", doesn't seem to notice subtle warnings.

As of April 15, 2010, the self-styled "hero" of the campaign to pass Oreo's Law remains a scoff-law private corporation risking its tax-exempt status by failing to submit IRS Form 990's to the New York State Charities Bureau, as required by state law. The Charities Bureau hasn't heard from Pets Alive since 2003.

In 2007, Pets Alive also needed to file for exemption from 2008 property taxes. Neither its founder, nor any member of the Pets Alive Board of Directors, fulfilled the requirement. Pets Alive was billed $46,000 for 2008 taxes and when they failed to pay, the county moved to foreclose.

Last month Pets Alive narrowly escaped disaster when the county executive took up their cause. Would Ed Diana -- the elected public official that Pets Alive says "has our back" -- intervene on behalf of the rest of the people in Orange County, New York if they didn't make timely submissions to the tax assessor's office, too?

It isn't clear how the Town of Wallkill and the Pine Bush School District, short-changed when revenue from Pets Alive taxes failed to materialize, will manage without the income they expected. Does Diana have $23 thou for the Pine Bush School District? Cause they're looking for the funds.

Business as usual at Pets Alive

In addition to its on-going failure to comply with state law, Pets Alive also continues to sell "cranky" dogs to "self-centered, arrogant, egotistical and yes, stupid people" who later return the dog, ask for their money back, involve their lawyer when Pets Alive refuses to issue a refund, and complain to the Better Business Bureau.

The beg-a-thons continue.

The rationalizations for importing more and more animals from all over the country, and Puerto Rico, increasingly sound like a page from a hoarder's diary. Days away from last month's near-miss with foreclosure, Pets Alive was busy bringing in more animals:

But they refuse to stop rescuing animals — [co-Executive Director] DeAngelis was in West Virginia over the weekend, rescuing more than 80 dogs and cats. "We just can't stop on the possibility that we might close," [co-Executive Director] Clair says.

The Road to No Kill ?

This isn't working for me. Not at all. It leaves a sour taste in my mouth -- and I'm a person who really wants to believe in "no kill." Or very, very low kill.

The pissing contests and political correctness assessments involving the ASPCA and the state legislature are bad enough.

But legislation that would further empower a dysfunctional group like Pets Alive, and mandate placement of vulnerable and possibly dangerous animals to their care?

I'm not buying it, and I don't think the people of New York should be compelled to buy it, either. This is no where.

ASPCA Flim-Flams the Feds

2010-04-05T17:08:00.009-04:00

Publicly-ish Accountable Law Enforcement

Privately employed, self-described "humane authorities" training civil servants and law enforcement personnel on the Fed's nickle. Nation, perception is everything.

You just gotta love Stephen Colbert:

It used to be, everyone was entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts. But that's not the case anymore. Facts matter not at all. Perception is everything. It's certainty. The perception of authority The ASPCA goes to great lengths to mimic public servants answerable to tax-payers and voters -- truthiness! gotta have it! -- but in reality ASPCA employees are private contractors responsible to a privately-controlled corporation which is effectively shielded from public scrutiny. The Freedom of Information Act doesn't apply to the ASPCA. They mostly don't have to tell us shit if they don't feel like it. ASPCA's privately employed personnel are responsible to its own privately-elected board of directors. Not "We, the People". U. S. Department of Justice underwrites ASPCA jive ASPCAPro.org (an ASPCA offshoot that has "gathered information and knowledge from our experts, along with profiles, sample materials, and inspiration from proven programs in the field, for you to share and use") recently announced a free, online training program for law enforcement personnel on "dogfighting detection." The program is financed by the U. S. Department of Justice. Knowledge from their experts, huh? "Experts" like Melinda Merck?

Is the DOJ okay with the ASPCA's scorched earth policy for "pit bull" owners in Georgia? Working hand in hand with Norred and Associates -- the private, for profit, security-firm-turned-humaniac-tool that boasted of initiating 19 raids leading to the ~~deaths~~ rescues of "fighting dogs" in Georgia in 2009 alone -- the ASPCA has been instrumental in violating the civil rights of dog and animal owners. Just as a reminder, here's a shot of the Merck tucking one of Joe Woodall's puppies under her arm and walking off with him. She dumped the pup in a dog pound 250 miles away, along with the rest of Joe's dogs. Merck never looked back.

Some "expert" she is. Woodall was never arrested, never charged with any crime. . .despite Merck's "expert" opinions. How many dogs have died due to ASPCA "expertise" ?

Privatized law enforcement: hunky-dory with the DOJ? The American Dog Breeders Association is calling for an investigation into interference in law enforcement functions by private corporations, including the ASPCA, in Georgia: The Governor or Attorney General of the State of Georgia should implement an immediate and thorough investigation into the undue and corrupt influence of these private corporations in law enforcement training and procedures. The citizens of Georgia cannot continue to be victimized by privately employed individuals operating in the public sector with the assistance and blind support of law enforcement and prosecutors throughout the state. Fair and lawful enforcement of Georgia statutes is the responsibility and exclusive domain of our public servants. I think the ADBA is right, and I hope the citizens of Georgia get their investigation. Your tax dollars at work: ASPCA training for civil servants Looking at the list of resources provided -- and there is plenty to choose from -- I have to wonder just what kind of crappola persons trained by Agent Orange are likely to receive. Planted in the ASPCA-dominated resource material are any number of truthy fake facts, like:

Tethered dogs and dogs not surgically sterilized are more likely to be "aggressive."

Castration leads to a "longer, healthier" life for pets.

"Many" "puppymills" thrive because the operators are animal torturers.

Private persons who take in large numbers of animals are "hoarders", and keep the animals in deplorable and squalid conditions.

And there's more. Lots more. Fake cops doing fake jobs

In the radical animal rights movement, each of the four main players has its own area of dominance. Sure, there's some overlap in activities, but there are no real policy differences between PeTA, Best Friends, HSUS and the ASPCA.

An extremist idea -- for example "doggy gonads just have to go" is first dramatized by PeTA.

Legislation to eliminate objectionable dog testicles and etc. is then lobbied by HSUS. . .

and resulting anti-testicle laws are subsequently enforced by the ASPCA's private army.

Finally, Best Friends steps in to make us feel better about the whole thing. We are promised that in compensation for genetic oblivion, the sterile dogs will get to live out their days in permanent seclusion in the middle of a desert.

Some shit, huh?

Perception-based government

Transparency-ness and public-ish accountability.

Anybody else got a problem with the DOJ handing over hard-earned dollars so that the ASPCA can mess with the minds of local sheriff's department employees? Who authorized the DOJ to bankroll an animal rights indoctrination program? Dude. Who stole my country?

Wayne Pacelle's 2009 Nightmares

2010-01-01T13:06:00.007-05:00

Blunders Wayne Pacelle Wanted to Bury Not everything went according to plan in 2009 Showered in Shit in Louisville The resignation of Metro Louisville Animal Control Director Gilles Meloche became effective on December 31. Back in the day, Meloche was HSUS's fave candidate for the job. He'll soon blow town with his tail tucked between his legs, in a firestorm of charges involving animal abuse, sexual harassment, financial irregularities and demands for his prosecution. Parts of the animal control ordinance Meloche used like a weapon against Louisville citizens and their pets were struck down by a federal court judge earlier this year, and the decision may serve as a model for reform in other jurisdictions as pet owners compare the provisions of the discredited Louisville ordinance with their own. In a sworn deposition, HSUS's man in Louisville reminded the world of what HSUS stands for: negative profiling, the encouragement of discriminatory practices and the steady harvest of low-hanging fruit -- like pets belonging to the poor: On "poor people" and dog license compliance, Meloche stated under oath: They just don't license, period. On "poor people" and access to veterinary care: First, we know one thing, they barely go to veterinary clinics. On "poor people" and cruelty to animals: Most of the cruelty that I've seen --that we see are from, of course, poor neighborhood, and it's dynamic. But, hey, HSUS's Kentucky State Director Pam Rogers thinks Gilles Meloche is "easy to work with" and HSUS helped Metro Louisville write the ordinance that empowered him. I hear there are enough claims pending from Louisville pet owners who suffered irreparable harm under Meloche's tenure to sue Louisville back into the Stone Age. Will Wayne Pacelle assume responsibility for that train wreck of an ordinance, and that freak of an animal control director? Nursing Puppies "Too Dangerous" to Live In February of this year, animal lovers were shocked and then sickened as HSUS employees John Goodwin, Chris Schindler and Amanda Arrington insisted that 127 dogs seized in North Carolina pursuant to dogfight charges--including 60 puppies, some so young they were still nursing--had to die. HSUS personnel cynically testified that the dogs were "too dangerous" to live and claimed that it would cost $190,000 each to rehabilitate them. The authorities listened to HSUS. None of the dogs was evaluated for potential placement. They were all killed. Setting aside the gut-wrenching, heartless leadership role HSUS played in forcing the slaughter of innocent animals, the public relations blowback suffered by HSUS and its crew of Dog Fight Czars was instantaneous and unrelenting. No-Kill advocate Nathan Winograd called the massacre "The Death of Hope."

HSUS critics were so implacable that two months later HSUS was forced into orchestrating an "emergency summit" (and whitewash opportunity) for what it called "pit bull stakeholders" in Las Vegas. Pacelle announced a revised and enlightened position on pit bulls. . .and immediately got caught pushing a breed specific policy in Indianapolis.

Animal lovers--and bloggers--aren't fooled so easily. Not any more. When the HSUS donation machine attempted to usurp the story of "Faye" -- attempting to foist HSUS off as the benefactor of a pit bull injured by dogfighting and begging for cash from a trusting public -- outrage quickly followed. It's getting harder and harder to find a pit bull owner that thinks HSUS is friend. Pit bulls are the coalmine canaries in HSUS's extremist war against pets and the people who love them. HSUS's blunders and flailings this year made it clearer than ever. John Goodwin: Animal Theft Under Color of Law Documentation of HSUS's Dogfight Czar himself seizing friendly, happy dogs from the homes of innocent people broke in 2009. John Goodwin was caught on videotape, partnered up with private security firm Norred and Associates, the ASPCA, and local authorities, and raiding a home. Videos of the seizure of beautiful, healthy dogs from Joe Woodall in Gilmer County, Georgia remain up on You Tube for all to see. What do you call it when privately employed individuals working for a not-for-profit corporation instigate a raid of some one's property, seize well-cared for dogs, dump them in a dog pound 250 miles away. . . and then walk away? Woodall was never arrested, never charged with a crime. HSUS just showed up and took his dogs. It cost Joe more than he could afford in lawyer's bills and eight weeks of sleepless nights before he got his dogs back, and they were a mess when they finally returned to him. So, what's the word for that? I'm thinking "theft" hardly does the sequence of events justice. Quick note for the many people who have asked: More than a year since the raid, Joe reports that "Weeman" -- the puppy that came home with down pasterns after eight weeks on the dog pound's cement floor and incorrect food -- is doing much better. Handsome, athletic and playful Weeman and the Woodall family that loves him stand ready for the challenges 2010 will bring. Footloose and fancy free with the feds In late December the Spay and Neuter HSUS campaign was launched. The campaign is calling for the revocation of HSUS's tax-exempt, charitable designation due to its excessive lobbying activities. The campaign provides 14 pages of questionable HSUS tax filings, policies and activities and requests the IRS fraud division to investigate them. Want a piece of the action? Follow the link above. It's not too late to join the thousands of animal lovers everywhere who have written to the IRS and to their own federal representatives demanding answers. We look forward to a response at your earliest possibility, Wayne-o. This ain't over. Not even close. But the start of the new year is a good time to take stock. These were some of HSUS's failures and flailings that meant the most to me. Best wishes for the coming year to Blue Dog State readers. And a heartfelt flip of the bird to you, Wayne Pacelle.

Pets Alive: Animal Sanctuary or Animal Scam?

2009-11-24T19:54:00.014-05:00

ASPCA Oreo-gate pays off big for Pets Alive

Disgraced "rescue" spins ASPCA crisis for own benefit

Pets Alive makes its bid for fame and fortune

As ASPCA Prez Ed Sayres struggles and fails to contain outrage from his own constituency over the decision to kill an abused dog previously used as a fund-raising and public relations tool, somebody in upstate New York saw a golden opportunity.

The ASPCA may continue to stutter and blurt explanations, but Pets Alive in Middletown, New York, already got what it wants: a shot at joining the humaniac elite by riding the coat tails of the ASPCA's acute ethical and PR problems.

Pets Alive's strategy was --
(a) feed the media frenzy and encourage negative publicity, and
(b) position Pets Alive as "more humane," "more ethical" and --very important !-- "more deserving of donations."

The ASPCA shot itself in both feet when it arrogantly exploited and then killed an abused dog. And as the dust settles on Oreo-gate, the Pets Alive gambit seems to have paid off. They're a clear winner. But is Pets Alive ready for prime time?

Oooooh, baby. Not hardly.

The whitewashing of Pets Alive

In the spring of 2007, the collection of 500+ animals at Pets Alive was in really bad shape. After founder Sara Whalen died of cancer in March and Pets Alive sought assistance from Best Friends Animal Society, the animal welfare disaster at Pets Alive became public knowledge. In ABC News coverage, a visitor to the 80 acre compound compared the place to Auschwitz.

Michael Mountain's prompt plea for money included shocking descriptions of animals confined in "substandard conditions" and in need of basics like routine vaccinations and treatment for worms. Other accounts described animals kenneled in the dark and malnourished:

In the wake of one tragedy – and working to avoid another – Best Friends teams have stepped in to save and care for hundreds of at-risk animals while trying to stabilize operations at the troubled Pets Alive sanctuary in upstate New York. Many of the more than 500 animals at the shelter were living in substandard conditions as founder Sara Whalen succumbed to cancer on March 19. . . .Toward the end, when the Pets Alive board learned the extent of the problem, they turned to Best Friends for help. [emphasis added]

What did Pets Alive's BOD know, and when did they know it?

Pets Alive's Board of Directors only learned about so many sick and neglected animals "toward the end"? Could dogs like Oreo end up warehoused in substandard conditions for an entire lifetime? Current Pets Alive Executive Co-Director Matt DeAngelis describes an intimate familiarity with the facility and the animals there going back eight years. Where was he when conditions at Pets Alive reached crisis stage?
As it launched its "Pets Alive Emergency operation" Best Friends blogged that deteriorating conditions at the facility were an issue for years.

Nobody noticed 500 or 600 at-risk animals, over a period of years, until the place "looked like Auschwitz"? How is that possible?

Learning about "proper care"

Best Friends pulled out of Pets Alive by January, 2008, leaving the Pets Alive staff gushing with gratitude:

Best Friends came to Pets Alive when we were in a desperate situation and they helped us in every way imaginable. They hired staff and taught us how to properly care for and house the animals. They helped us develop a network of volunteers and supporters, showed us better adoption practices, helped us train the animals (and the staff), and helped teach us how to stand on our own two feet. [emphasis added]

Pets Alive only learned how to properly care for and house animals in its care in 2007? What was going on during the "30 years of experience" they claim? Improper care?

Oh, and by the way, Pets Alive was incorporated in 1988. The corporation began doing business in New York State in 1990. The "new" Pets Alive dates from 2007, when Best Friends went back to Utah. There is no "30 years" of Pets Alive experience and expertise.

Business resumes at Pets Alive

By January, 2008, a scant nine months after the animal welfare crisis at its facilities was first acknowledged, Pets Alive was back to importing dogs from southern states and sending out desperate messages soliciting donations to care for them.

In February, 2008, finances became a big theme as Matt DeAngelis blogged about "too many animals and not enough space" while being "blind-sided" by a $3500 electric bill.

Can "reputable" animal sanctuaries be "blind-sided" by the arrival of a utility bill? What does that say about their administrative skills?

No money to safely contain aggressive dogs at Pets Alive

Two months later, in April, 2008, Co-Executive Director Kerry Clair blogs about an urgent need for adequate kennel runs for aggressive dogs then at Pets Alive:

We have two dogs that are in desperate need of a specific type of dog run. . .We worry about our regular chain link fencing and really need to put [a particular dog] in something more solid. . . We need to buy at LEAST 2 of them, and it would be best if we had five and could put all our “caution” dogs in these solid runs. . .Would you be willing to donate the cost of one panel? This will keep our staff, our dogs and our volunteers and visitors safer. Our funds are running low here at Pets Alive. . .We desperately need an influx of donations in the next few months. Matt is working on a direct mail campaign. . . [emphasis added]

Pets Alive didn't have the facilities necessary to keep staff and visitors safe? And they claim expertise in "aggressive" dogs? Where did Pets Alive plan to hold Oreo for her lifetime?

Disappearing horses, rumors of rabies

In December, 2008, horses boarded at Pets Alive during court proceedings and subsequently ordered returned to their owners by the judge when the case was adjourned contemplating dismissal, mysteriously disappeared after the owners refused to sell them to Pets Alive supporter Rob Thomas.

Astoundingly, in August, 2009, Kerry Clair blogged that Pets Alive knowingly "technically adopted out" a sick dog that had to be euthanized because. . .

. . .she continued to get worse and worse and eventually she had to be euthanized to spare her any more suffering. It was really traumatic for us all. We still do not know cause of death but the vets feel she either contracted rabies or distemper. . .[emphasis added]

Rabies ? Or was it distemper? Because there's a difference. And where was Pets Alive's concern for public health and safety?

I mean, rabies???

Orange County, New York foreclosing on Pets Alive ?

The November 13, 2009 issue of the (Middletown) Times Herald-Record included the usual legal notices, including a Petition and Notice of Foreclosure on the Pets Alive properties.

STATE OF NEW YORK SUPREME COURT, ORANGE COUNTY
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ X
IN THE MATTER OF THE FORECLOSURE :
OF TAX LIENS BY PROCEEDING IN REM :
PURSUANT TO ARTICLE ELEVEN OF THE REAL :
PROPERTY TAX LAW BY THE :
COUNTY OF ORANGE :
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------X
PETITION AND NOTICE OF FORECLOSURE Index No.:
2008-11479 TOWN OF WALLKILL
335200 21-1-3 PETS ALIVE, INC.
335200 22-1-30 PETS ALIVE, INC.
335200 22-1-32.1 PETS ALIVE, INC. ATTN: SARA WHALEN
335200 22-1-50.21 PETS ALIVE, INC.

Uh oh. That just can't be good news for the animals at Pets Alive. What would happen to dogs like Oreo, if their "sanctuary for life" was foreclosed? Then what? Huh?

Missing In Action with the New York State Charities Bureau

Organizations exempted from federal income tax under Section 501 of the tax code that "normally" have income in excess of $25,000 per year are required to file IRS Form 990. In New York, a copy of the 990 form is also provided to the Charities Bureau. Failure to comply with this or several other reporting requirements may result in revocation of the organization's tax-exempt status.

Even though Pets Alive routinely posts notices of large contributions ($200,000 from Rob Thomas/Sidewalk Angels in 2008) and indicates that it is a "valid 501(c)3 animal rescue", a Freedom of Information request to the NYS Charities Bureau for copies of Pets Alive's reports yielded no current information. In fact, on August 19, 2009 the Charities Bureau confirmed that Pets Alive has not remitted a Form 990 for five years. The last report they received covered tax year 2003.

Oreo's Law and more unanswered questions

In New York, "duly incorporated humane societies" --although they may sell or offer for sale hundreds and even thousands of pets annually-- are exempted from inspection under the state's regulation of "pet dealers."

The provisions of the Animal Welfare Act do not cover facilities like Pets Alive. No one checked on the care provided at Pets Alive, which housed an unknown portion of the 500 or 600 animals there in "substandard conditions" for an unknown length of time.

Could dogs like Oreo spend a lifetime, warehoused in inhumane conditions, if a proposal like "Oreo's Law" mandating unregulated "sanctuary" is enacted ? What protections exist for vulnerable dogs and other pets condemned to a lifetime of unsupervised, uninspected confinement in New York's private, not-for-profit, duly incorporated "humane" societies? What's going to happen when the sponsors of "Oreo's Law" realize that the "expertise" and "responsibility" of some animal sanctuaries may exist only in the imaginations and ambitions of their executive co-directors? Why hasn't anyone in the "humane" community spoken up?

There's clearly more than a small problem at Pets Alive, and it's not difficult to see.

Why the silence? When will the exploitation of an abused, dead dog by those who claimed to be her "rescuers" end?

Humane Havens for Dog Slaughterers

2009-10-26T15:05:00.173-04:00

Update on previously published article

Pit Bull Killer Maloney Rakes It In
at Humane Society of the United States

Movin' on up in the world of corporate dog-killing

Pacelle lauds "accomplishments" of exec who cut and ran after Boudreaux' dogs were slaughtered

Dontcha just love it? As ex Louisiana SPCA CEO Laura Maloney wiggles her way ever upward in the world of industrial animal killing "rescue", the bullshit just gets deeper and deeper. When she joined HSUS a year ago as Pacelle's chief of staff, he babbled on . . .

“I’ve worked alongside Laura in Louisiana during the effort to rescue animals following Hurricane Katrina, and in the battle to outlaw cockfighting in the state, and I have seen her excel in all the areas where’s she focused her attentions. We are an enormously complex organization, and I know she’ll help us make it run even better."

Better at what, Wayne? Killing animals?

Maybe setting up her employers for liability in civil suits stemming from her "rescue" activities?

Cause that's what Laura Maloney excels at.

Maloney was in charge when her blood-thirsty employees seized and immediately killed Boudreaux's 57 dogs. She "worked with authorities" to assure they acted on her allegations.

Boudreaux hadn't even been arraigned when Maloney's SPCA killed his dogs. No wonder Wayne Pacelle loves her.

But when the case went to court the charges were promptly dropped. That's a problem, Wayne. That's a big problem.

Birds finally come home to roost:
Lousiana SPCA settles Boudreaux suit

It has been a long, hard road for Floyd Boudreaux, his family, and the animal lovers that supported him and appreciated his dogs.

The undisclosed sum the SPCA will be paying out to Floyd and his family--and man, I hope it is huge--won't bring back the 57 dogs they lost on the evil day of the "humane" raid Maloney orchestrated against them. It can be no compensation for the extermination of a cherished, 200 year-old line of champions. No amount of money can make what that family went through go away.

But it serves as a warning to other private societies-for-the-prevention who think their cute little uniforms and cop-car clone vehicles will shield them from liability when they ~~fuck up~~. . .
uh, ~~indulge in a little mission creep~~. . .

okay let's cut to the chase and make that. . . do what they wanted to do all along and freaking slaughter beautiful animals belonging to innocent people.

Below is Blue Dog's October, 2009 piece on Maloney and her brilliant career. Let's just hope it finally comes to a screeching halt.
____________________________

Exonerated Pit bull breeder Floyd Boudreaux sues Louisiana SPCA

Disgraced SPCA CEO now ASPCA Sr. Vice President

Floyd Boudreaux made headlines last week with news of his suit against the Lousiana SPCA. The SPCA needlessly, wantonly--and apparently, illegally--slaughtered the Boudreaux dogs as fast as it could after the Boudreaux home was raided during a 2005 dogfighting investigation.

You'd think that Laura Maloney, Chief Executive Officer at the LA SPCA when it exterminated each and every one of Floyd's 57 dogs within 24 hours of seizing them would be unemployable. At least unemployable within the "humane" network where the lives of animals are supposed to count for something. Right? Societies for the prevention of cruelty aren't supposed to be in a flaming hurry to kill the dogs they just finished "rescuing."

Are they?

Ooops. Blue Dog's bad. . .

That's exactly what Maloney's LA SPCA did on that black day four years ago when Boudreaux' dogs were seized, and killed, by "humane" agents. Boudreaux was quickly acquitted when his case went to trial. But it was too late for his dogs.

Maloney's LA SPCA had already carried out sentence on his dogs. Boudreaux hadn't even been arraigned when the killings began.

Scurrying to avoid the cold light of day

State trooper Jacob Dickinson, the investigator that testified during the short trial that vindicated the Boudreaux family, said that "he believed the SPCA would house the animals and did not know the dogs would be euthanized."

But a representative from the SPCA testified that no one person at the nonprofit animal welfare group made the decision to kill the animals but that there was a general assumption that the dogs would be euthanized.

Deny, deny, deny. . .

Laura Maloney's Louisiana SPCA is asking us to accept that general assumptions killed 57 healthy, happy dogs as soon as they arrived at the "shelter"?

Are you kidding? What kind of an explanation is that? And how cold can you get?

The stress from losing those dogs, particularly the dog belonging to his 10 year-old grandson, caused Floyd to suffer a heart attack five days after the LA SPCA killed his dogs.

Rewarding ~~major fuck ups~~ general assumptions

So Maloney, and the LA SPCA, asks the world to believe that LA SPCA personnel just took it upon themselves to kill all those dogs, immediately, no questions asked. All in a day's work. What kind of out-of-control crack house does Maloney claim she was running, anyway ? How arrogant can you get?

ASPCA shelters Maloney from the storm

Moving on to the present. . . Maloney's feeling no pain. She's got a nice new job at the ASPCA. Delicately referring to Maloney's "national recognition for managing high-profile dog fighting cases" the ASPCA placed Maloney in charge of various business units including Humane Law Enforcement, Veterinary Forensics, Government Affairs/Legislative Initiatives, Field Services and the New York City Anti-Cruelty Center.

Some gig, huh? ASPCA Veterinary Forensics. Dang.

Lights going out in Georgia

So, was it Maloney that deployed Melinda Merck, the ASPCA Forensic head honcho now partnered up with Norred and Associates and HSUS ? These three private corporations are cutting a swath through the backwoods of Georgia right now -- seizing pit bulls first and asking questions later. Way, way later.

Is Merck acting on Maloney's instructions--or maybe just a general assumption--when she seizes puppies from the homes of innocent people? Does anyone at the ASPCA even care?

Waves of "humane change" don't reach every shore

What happens to all those seized dogs, anyway? Where are the dogs?

Something tells me that news of the great "Las Vegas Humane Sea Change", in which HSUS sort of agreed that dogs seized during fighting investigations don't necessarily need to die, has been slow to trickle down. Plenty of good dogs are dying lonely deaths for no good reason.

After HSUS, Norred, the ASPCA and the news crews blow town, the killing begins.
What responsibility does Merck, Maloney and the ASPCA assume for the fate of those dogs?

None.

Absolutely none.

ASPCA doesn't walk the walk

The ASPCA cannot employ people like Laura Maloney and look dog owners, particularly pit bull owners, in the eye. It is not possible.

Most especially, the ASPCA cannot put people with a history like Laura Maloney's in charge of Melinda Merck and her travelling pit bull confiscation show.

"We are their voice" ???

What a farce.

HSUS and ASPCA: Filling Pit Bull Burial Grounds

2009-08-12T15:08:00.011-04:00

John Goodwin, Melinda Merck caught in the act Who's hearing black helicopters now?

Seizing dogs for fun and profit: theft under color of law

Nobody ever accused convicted ALF terrorist and HSUS Dogfight Czar John Goodwin of getting bogged down in petty details.

Legalities, responsibility for the health and welfare of the dogs he and ASPCA's Melinda Merck seize, restitution for the cost of ~~failed attempts to kill pitbulls~~ lamentable errors made while pursuing the animal extremist "greater good" ?

Not even on Goodwin and Merck's radar.

HSUS offers a bounty for dogfighting "tips."

In the Line of Duty continues to dance to HSUS' tune, hyping "lucrative" dogfight busts to local law enforcement agencies.

And Norred and Associates? HSUS' private, for profit, ~~hired guns~~ investigators ? Why should Norred give a shit about a country boy, his family, and his handful of dogs? Norred was hired by HSUS to obliterate ~~pit bulls~~ dogfighting, and that's what they're gonna do.

The Curious Case of Joe Woodall, Gilmer County, Georgia

For 12 hours on October 28, 2008, the Woodall family watched helplessly as agents of the Humane Society of the United States, Norred and Associates, the ASPCA, local humane societies and local law enforcement swarmed over their property.

Among those executing the Woodall raid were:

John Goodwin, the Humane Society of the United States's "manager, animal fighting campaign." Despite the much bally-hooed "sea change" at HSUS, Goodwin remains very much in charge of HSUS's ~~pit bull~~ dogfighting eradication program.

Melinda Merck, the ASPCA's "forensic veterinarian." Merck takes pride in her "expertise."

In order to properly identify evidence, analyze it and interpret the findings, you have to know animals and animal behavior. This is what I do and what I bring to a crime scene. I am an animal expert investigating crimes against animals. .

Puppymillers R Us

2009-07-19T15:22:00.004-04:00

HSUS plays "responsible breeders" for fools Get a clue, sweetheart. The days of Camelot are over. Roger Caras is dead and buried, too. The American Kennel Club doesn't call the shots, Robert's Rules of Order count for shit, and declaring yourself a responsible, ethical, hobby dog breeder means nothing--nothing at all--to animal extremists. Oppose "puppymills", do ya? First of all, if by "puppymills" you mean "abusive, unlawful dog breeding facilities that violate generally accepted animal husbandry practices" . . .well, all I can say is: whoop de doo. How do you feel about global deforestation, kiddie porn, and adult illiteracy? For, or against? Any motherhood statements you need to get off your chest on, maybe, the torture of civilian combatants in Guantanamo? Puppymillers like you and me On the other hand, if by "puppymiller" you mean what the Humane Society of the United States means, better think again. Because HSUS and its extremist supporters are coming after you if you breed dogs. They don't care how much you love your dogs and how careful you are with your pups. HSUS's latest crop of anti-puppymill proposals have nothing to do with cruelty to animals. Instead, these proposals outlaw ownership or mere temporary custody of intact dogs (and cats). Custody of the happiest, healthiest most well-cared for dogs (and/or cats) in the world would be a criminal act under these proposals, if you happen to have "too many." Groomers, trainers, boarding kennel operators and doggie daycare facilities, huntsmen/women and mushers, vets. . .all potential "puppymillers" in the eyes of the Humane Society of the United States. "Too many" intact dogs in their custody could lead to criminal charges. Not because the animals were mistreated in any way. Oh, no. Just because they had custody of the wrong number. HSUS's numbers game: who wins, who loses?

Pet-Age got it wrong. Dogs are born intact, and some people choose to keep them that way, whether they intend to breed them or not. Its called personal preference, and its not criminal. Yet.

These aren't proposals to protect animals from "puppymillers." While disguised by anti-puppymill rhetoric, these proposals are designed to shut down breeders and take their animals. Period.

True agenda: seizure and destruction of animals Under HSUS's New York proposal alleged custody of the wrong number of cats and dogs may lead to seizure and forfeiture of the animals. Amazingly, in New York forfeited animals may be killed or sold off by the agency that seized them BEFORE the owner gets his day in court. So, HSUS and its acolytes could accuse someone of owning "too many" intact dogs and/or cats, seize them, kill them. . .and THEN the owner gets to go to court. Some shit, huh? Pencil in a number. Any number. Consider yourself "safe" because you don't have 50 (or 40 or 75) intact dogs and/or cats? Then you're an idiot.

The ASPCA is already signalling that twenty dogs could identify a breeder as a "puppymiller." There won't be any way to stuff that genie back in the bottle, folks. Numbers were made to change. Once criminal animal cruelty can be charged based only on alleged numbers of animals present--and not the quality of care they are provided--home and hobby breeding of dogs and cats will come to a screeching halt. Ditto sports and hunting kennels, or any other place where intact dogs tend to congregate. Shoulder to shoulder with HSUS's Jennifer Fearing

Anyone else going to an anti "puppymill" demonstrations with Jennifer Fearing?

Before you pack your lunch and your poster, here's a trivia question to consider. Especially for California pit bull owners:

Question: Ingrid Newkirk, Bob Barker and Jennifer Fearing-- what document unites them all? Answer: All three signed a letter urging legislators to support SB 861, California's pit bull extermination law that continues to kill innocent dogs for the crime of being caught intact. SB 861 laid the groundwork for the global forced sterilization proposals rocking California today, four years later. Too bad "the Fancy" didn't see the writing on the wall back in 2005, isn't it? You can read the dim-witted letter Fearing signed, which claims that breed specific mandatory sterilization would benefit and even protect "pit bulls," here. We're all puppymillers

Or dogfighters. Or backyard breeders, or hoarders, or "irresponsible owners." Or blood-crazed, rifle-toting Bambi-killers.

There's an accusation out there waiting for each of us. In the end, no combination of OFA certified dams and performance-titled studs, no forlorn adherence to the mandates of a national breed club, no number of pups produced small enough to protect a targeted dog breeder from extremist allegations which will destroy their lives.

I've got a huge problem when "responsible" and "ethical" dog breeders --not to mention bloggers and freaking journalists -- fall for HSUS jive and completely, utterly, fail to see who they're climbing into bed with.

The Humane Society of the United States employs the best public relations advisors money can buy. Pacelle will position himself and HSUS any way necessary to achieve his goals. Watch what HSUS does. Not what HSUS says its doing. Don't be a chump.

HSUS Is Evil. And Proud Of It.

2009-06-06T15:46:00.005-04:00

Lobbying, fundraising and vegan food fun

Donations to the Humane Society of the United States at work

How a national extremist agenda gets served with a smile in New York

With a scant three weeks left in the New York legislative session and not a whole lot to show for it yet, employees of the Humane Society of the United States--the largest, wealthiest animal extremist organization in the world--kicked in to high gear in late May.

Endgame strategy?

Convert brains at the state capital into gelatinous mush, the HSUS way.

HSUS Regional Director Patrick Kwan: Hey, that's how he rolls.

And Kwan appears to have packed his toothbrush and airline frequent flyer card as the critical end-of-legislative-session last week of May came to a close. As Kwan's Twitter log of activities documented, the HSUS's point man in New York didn't spend much time at home as the lobbying season reached its climax.

From social calls on ~~hens~~ roosters (oops! good the Farm Sanctuary supporter got that pesky detail ironed out), a cameo appearance on public radio, and a barnstorming campaign through upstate New York, Kwan racked up the mileage. And he kept up a steady barrage of tweets and twitters--keep those home fires burning!--as he did it.

Bliggety blogs, facey spaces and tweetie pages

So here's Kwan's own rendition of how he spent the last week of May, with notations in bold. [And, yeah, I removed the links plugging extremist websites. They can get their own damn blogs.]

May 24: Visiting the rescued roosters . . . b4 their trip to sanctuary

May 25: Met Bernadine, a broiler hen believed to have escaped from truck. . .

May 27: My interview w/ WNYC

Assm Lentol @NYSenate Stavisky bill to strengthen NY animal fighting laws

Note: Kwan's radio interview mentions neither Asy. Lentol or Sen. Stavisky. Lentol chairs the committee where HSUS's proposal is now stalled and Stavisky is the Senate sponsor of the proposal.

But hey, a free tweet is a free tweet.

May 27: 3 "hens" I transported . . .are roosters. . . .

May 28: Visits & meetings w/ @FarmSanctuary + Tompkins County SPCA today; Lobbying for Animals workshop in Ithaca tonight

Note: Sen. James Seward, representing Ithaca, sits on the NY Senate Agriculture committee. On May 28, several extremist proposals, including one endorsed by the Humane Society of the United States, were stalled in the the NYS Senate Ag. Com.

Taste of Thai in Ithaca Commons was awesome - seitan + labeled vegan desserts May 29: Great meeting w/ the fine folks of Citizens Campaign for the Environment who are doing amazing anti-CAFO work. Watertown, NY

Note: Watertown is home to Senate Ag. Committee chair, Darrel Aubertine.

Had privilege to meet his son Ken Wiwa at Amnesty AGM RT @amnesty Ken Saro-Wiwa: The Legacy of an Environ. Defender Jefferson County SPCA loves ZooToo and shows it!

Note: Aubertine's home, near Watertown, is in Jefferson County

Will get to Syracuse around midnight to celebrate their 1st anniversay. 30%off vegan milkshakes + free cupcakes!

Note: Syracuse is the home district of Sen. D. Valesky. Valesky is the third ranking Democrat in NY's Democratically controlled Senate, and he sits on the Senate Ag. committee.

May 30: Just spoke to an amazing + inspiring crowd of anti-puppy mills advocates

Back to NYC tmrrw nite after advocacy tour of Woodstock, Binghamton, Watkins Glen, Ithaca, Watertown, Delmar, + Syracuse!

Note: Sen. Neil Breslin represents Delmar and sits on the NYS Senate Ag. committee.

At Recess Cafe in Syracuse for every Sat all-you-can-eat $5 vegan BBQ. In a business suit. Ha! May 31: Demo today from 11am-Noon in Cicero, NY to urge Petland to stop supporting puppy mills + selling puppies. See you there? Syracuse Airport - GOOD: Free WiFi + Ziploc bags at security BAD: No soymilk at the Au Bon Pain. Urgh

So, connect the dots. What do you get?

On June 2, two anti-pet breeder proposals--disguised as anti-"puppymill" bills--moved favorably out of the NY Senate Ag. committee.

One proposal would shut down small, hobby pet breeders. The other one is a limit law which will close moderate-to-large kennels and catteries. Both are in perfect alignment with HSUS head honcho Wayne Pacelle's "One generation and out. We have no problem with the extinction of domestic animals." goal. HSUS backs similar proposals in many states, most notably California.

The New York State Ag. Committee is chaired by the senator from Watertown. Members include the senators representing Delmar, Ithaca and Syracuse. Coincidence?

I'm just saying. . .

Your donations at work: gelatinous mush through lower intestines

Patrick hasn't posted his Travel & Expense report on Twitter, but zig-zagging around upstate New York doesn't come cheap. New York ain't Texas, but its a far piece from Brooklyn to Woodstock to Syracuse to Delmar to. . .

Somebody's got to pay.

I'm thinking its going to be the animals. The ones that remain caged in shelters throughout the country--particularly the pit bulls--because HSUS chooses to spend its money on lobbying, public relations and expanding its own influence.

And leaves the messy stuff to others.

New York City Housing Authority Bans 27 Dog Breeds

2009-04-30T16:46:00.003-04:00

Are some dog owners more equal than others in Big Blue NYC? Pet-friendly New York's Eve of Destruction On May 1, New York's NYCHA intends to enforce its new "pet policy" for the almost 178,000 apartments scattered throughout New York's five boroughs in its control. NYCHA provides homes to more than 400,000 New Yorkers.

Never much of a pet-friendly landlord, in 2002 NYCHA agreed to allow tenants one dog or cat, providing the pet was neutered and weighed 40 lbs. or less. But that was then. This is now. Seems that policy was just too liberal. Dig it. With explanations like "too many incidents of people’s dogs doing what they aren’t supposed to", NYCHA announced new rules, including breed specific prohibitions in a state that forbids breed specific laws. NYCHA's policy is in direct contradiction to an exisiting state law. As of May 1, 2009, the following dogs are prohibited (maybe):

Akita Inu, Alangu Mastiff, Alano Español, American Pit Bull Terrier, American Staffordshire Terrier, Argentine Dogo, Bedlington Terrier, Boston Terrier, Bull and Terrier, Bull Terrier, Bully Kutta, Cane Corso, Dogue de Bordeaux, Dogo Sardesco, English Mastiff, Fila Brasiliero, Gull Dong, Gull Terr, Irish Staffordshire Bull, Korean Jindo Dog, Lottatore Brindisino, Neapolitan Mastiff, Perro de Presa Canario (Canary Dog), Perro de Presa Mallorquín (Ca de Bou), Shar Pei, Staffordshire Bull Terrier, Tosa Inu. Also: any dog predicted to weigh more than 25 lbs. when full grown And even more: Even though this is all supposed to commence tomorrow, the list of breeds seems to change several times a day. The above list came from an NYCHA publication. Since then Boxers, Dobermans, German Shepherds, and Rottweilers have been included in assorted other news items. I think I saw Golden Retrievers on one. SNAFU at NYCHA Your guess is as good as mine as to which dogs are going to be illegal in six hours or so. I called NYCHA. Three times. NYCHA isn't talking. They're too busy "tweaking" their list. Who came up with that bizarre list of prohibited breeds? Was it their carefully compiled and well-documented records of dog-related incidents involving Gull Dongs ? How many problem Alangu Mastiffs live in the New York City public housing projects, anyway? Unexplained weight loss

Here's how it all began:

Dogs in public housing were becoming a headache. So, rather than work towards the enforcement of New York's comprehensive animal control laws (don't they watch Animal Precinct??? how do they avoid it???) the agency decided that 40 lbs. was "too much."

They figured 25 lbs. was a better number. And then . . . . . .the agency looked into popular breeds used for dog fighting. The result was a list of about 30 types of dogs that will be prohibited from being registered in public housing after May 1. NYCHA’s pet policy overview consists of an odd mix of large and small dogs believed to be aggressive, and rare breeds. Like a lot of other dog-bite related "science", the list seems to be stuck together with chewing gum and bullshit, and maybe a little 'net surfing. Poor people and their dogs don't count ? New Yorkers aren't crazy about BSL. Not at all. Big blue New York has resisted negative stereotyping of dogs and dog owners for years. Maybe NYCHA figures New Yorkers just don't want to know happens in the projects? Is this a "people like us" vs. "people like them" thingie? Poor people just don't deserve pets? Is that the reasoning? Rich people have more rights than folks in the projects?

Say whaaat? Enter ~~Dracula~~ Peter Vallone Jr., Stage Right

Proving once and for all that he is a complete media whore, Vallone couldn't resist the opportunity to ~~shoot his mouth off~~ uh ~~make a fool of himself~~ uh pander once again to the public's most fearful, most racist tendencies-- "Finally someone is realizing that these potentially dangerous animals have no place in a confined urban space," said City Councilman Peter Vallone (D-Queens), who has unsuccessfully lobbied state legislators to ban the dogs. Think Vallone has a clue about what he's saying? Any clue at all? How many out of control Bedlington Terriers are there in New York public housing projects ? I'm so excited. I just can't hide it. With the ASPCA in there "negotiating" with NYCHA, and May 1st just hours away. . . the tension's killing me. To calm my nerves, I'm gonna write a letter to the Chairman of the New York City Housing Authority, Ricardo Elías Morales. I'm going to ask him why rich people are protected by the laws of New York State, but people living in city housing projects aren't. Then I'm going to ask him what he's got against Boston Terriers and the people who love them. . .even if they aren't rich.

You should, too.

Pet Airways: No red carpets for "pit bulls"

2009-04-24T14:20:00.002-04:00

Special requirements for "certain" dogs, plus a dose of corporate snark

What a way to run a pet-friendly airline!

The 8 per cent solution: Enough to make Best Friends look the other way on discrimination?

So, here's an interesting problem in corporate ethics. Best Friends Animal Sanctuary--the animal rights giant that makes a very big deal about how pit bulls are no different than other dogs--just announced a partnership with brand new Pet Airways.

Pet Airways has generously made a financial commitment to Best Friends and will also be donating flights to help transport rescued and adopted pets, says Namrata Chand, Best Friends cause marketing manager.

“Their services will not only provide a safe, comfortable and fast way to transport animals, but will also be a big cost savings for Best Friends,” Chand says.

In addition, eight percent of the price of each Pet Airways ticket purchased by Best Friends supporters will be donated to Best Friends.

Sounds like a sweet deal for everybody, right?

Wrong. And I'm here to tell you why.

No "separate but equal" for doggies

Looking past all the festivities and celebrations on Best Friends' website, the owners of "certain" dogs are going to find the following requirement buried in Pet Airway's contract of carriage:

SHIPMENTS SUBJECT TO ADVANCE ARRANGEMENTS The following shipments shall be acceptable for carriage by Carrier only upon Advance Arrangements: ... (D) Shipments of the following breeds of dog: Pit Bull, American Pit Bull Terrier, American Staffordshire Terrier, Saffordshire Bull Terrier, Presa Canario.

Its kind of like the Alabama "Literacy Test." Sure, everyone gets to vote.

Blacks and Latinos just had to pass a little test first.

No big deal. Right?

Pet Airways spokespeople: snark and doubletalk

Consider this email exchange between a Pet Airways Customer Care professional--re-named "Dick"--, and a potential Pet Airways client:

Dick: . . .[Y]ou are not presenting owners of this breed in a very good light. It seems to me that you are the one that has the aggressive tendency, not your pet. We are trying to do something good for all breeds, so I suggest that next time a little less antagonism and a little more dialog would be a better way to approach a situation. If you have an issue, I suggest you talk before you jump to conclusions. We can always amend our policies based on calm dialog, can you amend your behavior?

["Dick" later continued]

You obviously have issues. We are trying to help, you are not. Please seek professional help. You are more aggressive than your pit bull.

In other words, Pet Airways responded with a defensive snit yielding condescension, negative stereotypes, and that old stand-by: deny, deny, deny.

"Dick" apparently thought his approach was best for dealing with gang-banging, drug-dealing, dog-fighting "pit bull owner." Did he get it from the Pet Airways customer care manual?

Another silver-tongued Pet Airways spokesperson showed up over at Yes, Biscuit. This time, the explanation was that. . . The reality is this we work with Best Friends to transport those very dogs that you say we are discriminating against. In fact, we are the only airline that even would consider transporting dogs with aggressive pasts. Dogs with aggressive pasts" ? WTF? Sometimes it's best to just step away from the keyboard, guys. Really. Crap, they had to haul out a dictionary to explain what "discrimination" means over at Yes, Biscuit. "Selecting some breeds for different consideration" . . .hellloooo ? Partnering up with Pet Airways: what Best Friends brought to the table

I'm getting this vision of the deal struck between Best Friends and Pet Airways.

Best Friends gets 8%, and in exchange Pet Airways gets a slice of that sweet, sweet Vicktory Dog pie. I'm thinking maybe a little clip on "Dog Town" as Pet Airways delivers one or two "fighting dogs" -- infant puppies that managed to survive their rescuers, duly delivered for $190,000's worth of rehabilitation, each, in Kanab, Utah.

Quid pro quo. Business. "Cause Marketing", even.

But what do you wanna bet "national pit bull stakeholders" would lap it up?

Let's predict the future! Why not?

Take Blue Dog's poll! Make your voice heard!

After all, your wildest imaginings, and most bumbling verbalizations, couldn't be any worse than Pet Airways' performance.

Hey, Pacelle! Suck it up and fire John Goodwin!

2009-04-10T20:24:00.004-04:00

Talk's cheap, Wayne. Why don't you ditch the criminals working for HSUS?

Then maybe. . .just maybe. . .you'll have a basis for conversation with true "pit bull stakeholders."

Too much talk, not enough action.

HSUS's long-promised meeting of "national pit bull stakeholders" in Vegas was held on Wednesday. Everybody went home days ago.

It seems that Best Friends managed to forgive the Humane Society of the United States and wag its tail over HSUS's change of heart: no more automatic killing of innocent dogs. Maybe.

Is the "breakthrough" all its cracked up to be?

Future protocols and updated manuals: pesky details not available.

Forgive me if I refrain from doing cartwheels across the lawn, Wayne.

Not while "animal protection" for pit bulls remains exponentially missing in action and HSUS's Dogfight Czars remain on the job.

HSUS's new position on dogs seized during dogfight busts is like swiss cheese. . .plenty of places for the lives of vulnerable dogs to get lost.

Little feet are tap-tap-tapping, Wayne.

Here are some real deal stakeholder recommendations for the Humane Society of the United States:

1. Fire John Goodwin, HSUS's ranking "fighting dog expert" -- and Animal Liberation Front terrorist. HSUS foisted Goodwin and that "HSUS says pit bulls must die, die, die" policy on the public for years. Goodwin has no place in a reformed Humane Society of the United States, and no credibility with the sheltering community.

2. Fire Amanda Arrington and Chris Schindler -- the two HSUS employees who testified that nursing pit bull puppies are a threat to public safety. They are liars.

3. Fire Patrick Kwan, HSUS's New York director, too. Kwan is busy telling people that New York law treats dogfighting spectators like people who don't put enough spare change in parking meters, and claims that, accordingly, hordes of dogfighters from Jersey travel to New York. The myth Kwan is struggling to create is almost as ridiculous as the "baby pit bull puppies are too dangerous to live" thing. See point two above.

Put some effort into it, Pacelle.

Stop employing liars and criminals. Because the sworn testimony of Humane Society of the United States state Director, Amanda Arrington, during the February 16, 2009 hearing in Wilkes County (NC) Superior Court makes one thing very clear: the "animal protection" racket knows no shame. Fifteen minutes of HSUS "expertise" killed 146 pit bulls Two months ago, Ms. Arrington -- backed up by HSUS's Chris Schindler -- appears to have based her assertion that it was Best Friends Animal Society that set the $190,000 per dog cost for rehabilitating "fighting dogs" on an amicus brief signed by 11 amici in November, 2007, during the wild scramble of the Michael Vick prosecution. The amicus brief originally estimated a rehabilitation cost of $2,500 per dog. The figure mysteriously staggered on up to the astronomical $190,000 that Arrington used in court. The later version of the amicus was amended to read-- Rehabilitation of fighting dogs is a time consuming, labor intensive effort which requires 4 to 6 hours each day per dog. Qualified trainers earn between $50.00-$75.00 per hour. At 5 hours a day, 30 days a month, this is $9,750 dollars per month of training. To this, add food and veterinary care, and the price to rehabilitate a fighting dog is a little more than $10,000 per month. If training and rehabilitating a dog takes 18 months, the cost rises to $180,000 plus the run cost of $10,000 or $190,000 per dog. With "amici" like that. . . Was the insane overstatement of likely costs a case of lawyerly maneuvering? Did the amici put that astronomical number out there in order to soak the target (Vick) for the max? Did avarice get in the way of common sense? On their own website Best Friends gave a base estimate at $40,000 per dog for a lifetime of care in an institutional setting, (with the warning that the cost could be higher in the case of the Vick dogs).

Heartless in Wilkesboro: the Humane Society of the United States Arrington simply asserted that, "in their own words," Best Friends said it would take about $190,000 to rehabilitate each of Ed Faron's dogs. Even the nursing puppies. HSUS's "experts" didn't protest the outrageous guesstimate of $190,000 for each dog. HSUS didn't offer to rehab the dogs for less. In fact, HSUS didn't offer a dime from their own extensive resources -- not surprising since in 2007, the Humane Society of the United States contributed less that 4% of its $91.5 million budget to the sheltering of pet animals. HSUS was out to kill those dogs.

Two months later, you're asking us to believe that four days in Las Vegas changed all that ?

Nathan Winograd's got the skinny on how things went in Vegas, and he's not too optimistic on how the "bust summit accords" will shake out.

[W]e hold back comprehensive progress because Wayne Pacelle won’t allow for more, and we accept it for no rational, financial, or practical reasons other than Pacelle refuses. It doesn’t have to be this way. It is only this way because we let it be. The power he has is the power we give him.

Let me add a big fat raspberry from Blue Dog State. Like Winograd, I'll believe it when I see it.

HSUS on Pit Bulls: Better Off Dead

2009-04-02T14:36:00.000-04:00

$190 Thousand per Pup: Price tag for an innocent life? HSUS's sworn court testimony pushes for puppy slaughter The two HSUS baby Dog Fight Czars -- Amanda Arrington and Chris Schindler -- that testified before Superior Court Judge Ed Wilson Jr. in Wilkesboro, North Carolina in February, got what they wanted: The deaths of every last one of Ed Faron's dogs. The dogs had been seized as evidence in a dogfighting prosecution. A number of the puppies held by Wilkes County were born after the seize took place -- they had never lived at Wildside Kennels at all. All of them, even puppies like this one -- so young they were still nursing -- were killed following HSUS's "expert testimony." There were no evaluations of the individual dogs. No assessments of their histories, their health, their temperaments, their potential. Nothing. HSUS arranged for them all to die. HSUS's weasel words in open court Arrington and Schindler agreed, in court and under oath, that all of the Wildside Kennel dogs had to die. To quote Arrington's rendition of standard HSUS die, die, die policy: "I think it is an unrealistic expectation for us to ask these dogs that have been bred generations for fighting to become regular pets. " Arrington--an HSUS Regional Director--is apparently in total denial of how well the Vick dogs have done. Figures, since HSUS wanted the Vick dogs dead, too. Chris Schindler, HSUS's Deputy Manager, Animal Fighting Enforcement, put it this way: "These dogs have been bred for generations upon generations for a single purpose of animal fighting; the puppies included." What a crock of shit. That is the history of every "fighting dog" in the world. Its the history of every terrier worth its salt. Yet they can be excellent pets. Pit bulls -- bred for fighting for generations and yadda yadda -- have won the hearts of Americans for centuries. James Thurber's short story about life with a pit bull that came from "fighting lines" ran in the New Yorker in 1935. Find a copy at your library, and keep the Kleenex box handy. The $190,000 question: perjury? or extortion?

During her February 16, 2009 testimony, Arrington said something halfway unusual, though.

She testified that Best Friends Animal Society put a price tag on the cost to rehabilitate the Wildside dogs: $190,000. Each. Arrington: [Best Friends is] offering to assist. That is their language that they used. That means it would still be the county's responsibility. And in their own words, it costs about $190,000 per dog to rehabilitate them. THE COURT: $190,000 to rehabilitate a dog? MS. AMANDA ARRINGTON: Yes, sir. THE COURT: That's what Best Friends says? MS. AMANDA ARRINGTON: Yes.

Sounds like the Court had a little trouble digesting that figure, but HSUS's Chris Schindler backed her up on it:

"THE COURT: Sir, did you want to add something?

MR. CHRIS SCHINDLER: I'm Chris Schindler. I'm the Deputy Manager, Animal Fighting Law Enforcement, Humane Society of the United States. Your Honor, basically agree with all the things that everyone else has said. . ."

Pennies from heaven? Not hardly.

So, where did that $190,000 figure come from?

Did Best Friends Animal Society, which walked off with a huge chunk of Michael Vick's money, really hope to get $190,000 per dog for the Wildside Kennels pups?

Or did the Humane Society of the United States just make up more shit--also known as perjury--in order to impress the court?

Hard to say, isn't it? Plenty of questions, not many answers

Yes Biscuit is building quite a list of unanswered questions.

Caveat's got some good ones, too.

Me? I'd like to know if Arrington and Schindler are going to just -- poof! -- disappear, now that HSUS's heartless, sick fuck up in Wilkes County is becoming public knowledge.

Kinda like what happened to Laura Maloney, LA SPCA's former director.

The woman who okayed the slaughter of Floyd Boudreaux' dogs made a hasty move to Australia, beyond the reach of subpoenas, reporters and pesky bloggers, before Floyd's trial began.

Will HSUS disappear Arrington and Schindler? HSUS's date with "national pit bull stakeholders" in a no-tell hotel in Vegas is fast approaching and Arrington and Schindler are pariahs.

If HSUS wants to convince the world that "change" is a word in its vocabulary, too, I'm thinking Arrington and Schindler's days are numbered.

Not that ditching two little baby Dog Fight Czars will make a difference.

The final question

Does the Humane Society of the United States speak for you?

Or are you as revolted by all the lies, killing and fund-raising masquerading as "animal protection" as I am?

What's it gonna be?

Dogfighting: Does HSUS speak for you?

2009-03-18T12:05:00.003-04:00

Baby Dogfight Czars press the flesh at state capitals Humane Society of the United States barnstorms the country Does Wayne Pacelle, and John Goodwin, speak for you? Don't look now, but the world's largest, wealthiest animal extremist organization claims to represent us all as it delivers its twisted message to legislators coast to coast. After insisting for years that nursing pit bull puppies are too dangerous to live, HSUS wants to consolidate its position in the minds of elected officials as the supreme source on all dogfighting questions. It just doesn't get any sicker. Doubletalk and weasel words: Patrick Kwan works the New York crowds Kwan's large travel budget goes without saying. But, impressive T & E funds only go so far. Baby Dogfight Czar Kwan laid a couple of big ones as he struggled to charm. HSUS's relentless campaign in the Empire State includes "Lobbying 101" classes that hammer New York's dogfighting statutes, and presentations to groups like the Ulster County Democratic Women. As they shake their heads over the abuse of kittens and puppies, I wonder if those nice ladies realized that HSUS does not operate a single shelter for the abused pets it claims to champion, despite its over $100 million in assets? Playing footsie with the facts The alternate version of "reality" Kwan puts out as he criss-crosses New York doesn't stand up to scrutiny. For example. . . Kwan and HSUS insist that New Jersey's dogfighting laws are "better" than New York statutes. According to HSUS, New York should copy New Jersey laws. But HSUS doesn't mention that there are four current proposals to "strengthen" New Jersey dogfighting laws. HSUS will keep on promoting the need to "strengthen" laws until pit bulls are "protected" right into extinction. Want to be the world's capital of dogfighting? Get in line. For New York crowds, HSUS's position is that New York is the "world's capital" of dogfighting. Even though New York is a weak contender for the title. In California, it's California that's in crisis. Or maybe the world's capital is North Carolina? After all, according to HSUS, North Carolina is the "hub of professional dogfighting." Or Maryland? Was it was Maryland that's so soft on dogfighting?

Confused yet? That's because there's no substance, no fact, behind any of these HSUS assertions. Caravans of dogfighters on the NYS Thruway You didn't hear about that one? No? Kwan insists that hoards of Jersey dogfighters are swarming to New York -- which of course they aren't, but what the hell. . . Geez. With all that toll revenue coming from New Jersey wallets, New York better leave their dogfight laws "as is." Where's the fire, baby Dogfight Czar? The truth is that New York averaged only four dogfight convictions annually over the last ten years. The ASPCA confirms that dogfighting is not prevalent in New York City. God knows what Kwan, who moonlights as Super Vegan the restaurant critic, has been smoking. And HSUS won't be satisfied until all pit bulls everywhere are dead. HSUS knocking on state Capitol doors When HSUS speaks to legislators, it lies. It distorts. It makes shit up. HSUS claims a membership of 10 million people . Kwan claims 800,000 New York members, or one out of 24 residents. That's enough to get any legislator's attention. . .unless someone mentions to their public servants that HSUS's 2007 tax returns indicate 420,000 members. Globally. Pressure on legislators from animal rights extremists has never been more intense, and it's going to get much worse. Does HSUS speak for you? HSUS will be in the New York state capital, Albany, on March 30. HSUS will be in your state capital soon, too. If they haven't been there already. So, are you okay with puppy slaughter, manufactured "statistics" and the wild imaginings of baby Dogfight Czars? Looking forward to a bunch of new laws based on lies and fear-mongering? Me? I'm damned if I'll allow my elected representatives to assume that the Humane Society of the United States speaks for me.

It doesn't.

Wayne Pacelle Blinks

2009-02-24T10:51:00.008-05:00

Pitbull Puppy Slaughter Campaign puts HSUS on the defensive Did Wayne blink ? Or wince ? Whole lotta butt covering going on at HSUS Turns out the Humane Society of the United States can't throw its weight behind the slaughter of defenseless, un-weaned puppies without hearing from its own constituency. The furor over HSUS's merciless extermination plan for the Wildside Kennels dogs caught some very tender parts of Dogfight Czar John Goodwin--and his boss Wayne Pacelle--in a vise. And then, guess what happened ? Its magic! HSUS's new policy: evaluate dogs before they're killed! Amazing! Five days after the day Wilkes County, NC, bowed to HSUS pressure and killed every single dog seized from Wildside Kennels -- including 60 or more puppies (some born after the seize) -- and 4.99 days after HSUS's shit hit the fan, Wayne Pacelle announces . . .

"an interim policy recommending all dogs be evaluated as individuals. . .[HSUS] is calling a meeting of leading animal welfare organizations concerning dogs victimized by dog fighting."

Wayne was going to do the right thing. Of course he was! Wayne was setting up a conference and everything!

Nevermind what Dogfight Czar Goodwin said : "the dogs have been bred for fighting and it would very difficult and expensive to re-train the dogs, even the puppies. . ."

Nevermind what HSUS's North Carolina Regional Representative, Amanda Arrington, said : "these particular dogs have been bred for aggression." The proper audience response is. . .

Shock and awe

So get with the program. And assume the position.

The magic wand has been waved. Pixie dust is in the air.

Or maybe not.

Will Pit Bull owners and advocates buy into the reformation of HSUS?

I don't know about you, but I'm not about to forget the thousands of helpless dogs that died, and still die each year, because HSUS says they must.

Every shelter dog deserves a fair evaluation. Yes, Biscuit is right.

Does HSUS think their "experts" are up to the task? Cause HSUS brought in an "expert" to look at Pat Patrick's dogs, and we all know how that went.

Kick HSUS the hell out

The Humane Society of the United States needs to get out of the pit bull "rescue" biz.

They have no credibility. They are not "stakeholders" and have no place among the "national stakeholder organizations that deal with pit bulls" that Pacelle says he invited to his little conference. History cannot be rewritten.

Core values won't go away after a kissy-kissy weekend in Vegas.

Wayne Pacelle wants my dog dead.

He wants your dog dead.

Pacelle hired a convicted ALF terrorist, and made the freak his "issues expert" on dogfighting.

He's offering a $5000 bounty for report-a-neighbor "dogfighting" tips.

It doesn't get more irresponsible, more hate-driven, more pathological than that.

Tell ya what, Wayne

Invite Floyd Boudreaux to speak at your little conference. Floyd would likely be the only one in the room with any true expertise on the evaluation, care and handling of high drive, real deal "pit bulls."

Acknowledge the AADR, or the ADBA, or crap, even the UKC, as a "national pit bull stakeholder." Invite them to your Vegas shindig.

Maybe then folks might, just might, believe you aren't still shitting them.

HSUS Kills Puppies

2009-02-20T09:27:00.003-05:00

HSUS Kills Puppies Die, die, die says Dogfight Czar John Goodwin Newborn puppies are too dangerous to live 127 dogs, including 60 puppies, were killed by Wilkes County, North Carolina this week after their owner plead guilty to dogfighting charges. His dogs, including 60 puppies -- including newborns like this one -- are all dead. Newborn puppies are too expensive to save

The world's largest, wealthiest "animal protection" organization -- one with over $113 million in assets and a reported income of over $100 million -- stood by while dogs are slaughtered. HSUS advocated it, in fact.

Why?

Goodwin sez. . .

"it would very difficult and expensive to re-train the dogs, even the puppies. . ."

Blogosphere's on fire

This is going to leave a mark, Pacelle.

Some of my favorites--

Caveat has an excellent summary-- Time to Take the "Humane" out of HSUS Lassie, Get Help: Worse than Vick Yes, indeed. Yes, Biscuit's got HSUS cold: Pants on Fire Even HSUS's usual apologists aren't happy. Wayne's trying to change the subject, but the stink of HSUS's role in slaughtering innocent dogs is everywhere. Steal this widget ! Frog Dog Blog knows fraud when she sees it. Got a blog? Website? E-list? Put this widget up, courtesy Frog Dog Blog.

No more dead dogs

Sickened by extraordinarily wealthy multinational "animal protection" organizations that advocate the death of tiny puppies? Got a problem with donations to save animals that instead fund killing sprees?

Me, too.

Help get the truth out. Put up the widget, get yourself a blog, newsletter, whatever.

Be a part of the solution.

Racism and intolerance at Westminster: PETA puts on KKK robes

2009-02-09T20:46:00.008-05:00

Racism and intolerance at Westminster PETA puts on KKK robes Who's under the sheet and pointy hat? Ingrid Newkirk Those zany kids at PETA planned to embarrass exhibitors and spectators at the Westminster Kennel Club dog show by dressing up in KKK robes. The crowds are supposed to appreciate a provocative, gratuitous comparison between the American Kennel Club and the Ku Klux Klan. But PETA blundered. Ingrid exposed her own intolerant, racist and violent agenda. PETA, the animal rights extremist organization that operates a death camp for pet animals, characterizes certain dog owners as "pimps and drug dealers" and heartily congratulated Lancaster, California, on its racially-motivated anti-gang law, is no champion of pet ownership. Does that robe and hood fit, Ingrid? Then wear it. Bring me your tired, your poor Residents of New York City -- one of the most racially and ethnically diverse cities in the country -- will likely take one look at those robes and hoods and draw their own conclusions. New Yorkers are gonna have a problem with the repugnant sight of white supremacists on the streets of Manhattan. A city that routinely elects gay, Catholic, Jewish, ethnic minority and/or non-white public servants isn't going to be cool with the Klan in Midtown Manhattan. NAACP has a problem with PETA So does the Southern Poverty Law Center. And the Jewish community. PETA's exploitation of racial tragedies and human suffering has a long, sordid history. Back in 2005, PETA encountered intense criticism to their depictions of black people in chains. “PETA operates by getting publicity any way they can,” said John White, an NAACP spokesman. “They're comparing chickens to black people?” Mark Potok, director of the Intelligence Project with the Southern Poverty Law Center, in Montgomery, Ala., called the exhibit “disgusting.” “Black people in America have had quite enough of being compared to animals without PETA joining in,” he said. PETA officials apologized earlier this year for a campaign that compared the suffering of Jews during the Holocaust with that of factory animals.
Nothing funny about the Klu Klux Klan PETA's own support groups have problems with this latest animal extremist assault. The Superbowl masturbation-with-food video was bad enough, but even Eccentric Vegan displayed more common sense, and more sensitivity, when it came to use of Klan imagery.

"This is not “unfortunate moments in human history” as some anti-PETA spokepeople call the KKK, this is real life, current racism, hate, murder. No one should dress as a Klansman, not even as part of a protest. It’s too confusing, it’s too provocative, it’s too racist. It’s not funny, it’s not safe, it’s not OK."

What would Al Sharpton say ? I have to wonder what New York's Rev. Al Sharpton would have to say at this point. PETA successfully recruited Sharpton, who made a video urging black people to boycott Kentucky Fried Chicken. . .even though Sharpton has no problem with eating fried chicken at all. Is Rev. Sharpton happy to see hoods and robes on 7th Avenue? I'm just saying. . . What would President Obama say ?

How about our president, whose intricate and thoughtful "race speech" included . . .

". . .for all those who scratched and clawed their way to get a piece of the American Dream, there were many who didn't make it - those who were ultimately defeated, in one way or another, by discrimination. . . .For the men and women of Reverend Wright's generation, the memories of humiliation and doubt and fear have not gone away; nor has the anger and the bitterness of those years."

What would President Obama say about animal extremist whackjobs, dressed as Klu Klux Klan members, wandering the streets of New York?

I'm thinking President Obama will have a problem with it, too.

Write President Obama a letter.

The sooner, the better.

There are lots of good reasons to despise PETA's hate-filled Ku Klux Klan campaign. Really, a lot of them. Keep in mind that PETA serves as the advance guard, the shock troops, in the extremist war against pet owners. These pathetic people draped in sheets are expendable. They're cannon fodder. PETA only wants to get the [your choice: racist/intolerant/bigoted/animal rights] ball rolling. Plant the seed. Start the conversation. This won't end with Westminster. So write Barack a letter. Ask him what he thinks of a group that puts on KKK robes and tries to draw a parallel between a dog show and a racist secret society that brought violence, death and destruction to untold numbers of people in the past. . .and continues to do so today. Cause I don't think President Obama will like it. Not at all.

Profiling dog lovers in Lancaster, California

2009-02-02T12:04:00.002-05:00

Profiling dog lovers in Lancaster PETA's Ingrid Newkirk does her happy dance California's SB 861 slices off human testicles, too Mayor Parris wants certain dogs, and certain dog owners, gone by sundown. Basing himself on HSUS's "pit bulls are the preferred dog of gang-bangers, drug dealers. . ." fake factoid, Parris and the City of Lancaster are proud of their new breed specific mandatory spay neuter ordinance. They see it as an anti-gang tool. Dog law? Or covert racism? Sucking up to his audience's worst fears, Parris says he has no problem with calculated harassment of certain residents and welcomed the ordinance, which is based on extreme negative stereotypes of both dogs and owners. Critics fear the Lancaster ordinance will lead to profiling of young black and Latino men seen with "pit bulls" or Rottweilers as gang-bangers. Parris wasn't concerned: "I have no desire to help [gang-bangers]. The only thing I want to do is crush them and remove them from the community." Kindly, gently annihilating dogs California's infamous SB 861, supported and co-authored by members of the "humane" movement, opened the door for local ordinances like Lancaster's. Breed specific mandatory surgical removal of reproductive organs is spreading in California. Now Rottweilers and Rottweilers owners have been caught in the crossfire. Love does not discriminate, except in the Golden State where the "humane" movement helped dismantle the protections state law once offered by prohibiting breed profiling. Bad Rap's Excellent Adventure in Legislation The slickest pit bull "rescue" in the country helped write SB 861 -- rationalizing what they did as "re-tooling the preamble of the bill to outline the intent of the bill and to remove the 'dangerous and vicious' language that was going to flatten all of us." As Bad Rap tap dances as best they can, they claim they "officially" opposed SB 861. But how can you collaborate on a proposal and oppose it as the same time? Bad Rap hasn't had a whole lot to say about the Lancaster ordinance, but PETA and Ingrid Newkirk are thrilled. Of course, Ingrid would happily kill every dog Bad Rap wants to find a home for. R. Rex Parris' hate campaign for the eradicatation of ~~pit bulls~~ gang-bangers Bad Rap thinks they removed the language that was going to "flatten" us. Apparently not. It looks like everyone didn't get that memo. Successful lawyer and newbie Mayor R. Rex Parris of Lancaster, California campaigned on a law-and-order, gang-eradication platform. And he sure loves to shoot off his mouth: "I want gangs out of Lancaster," Mayor R. Rex Parris said in a recent interview. "I want to make it uncomfortable for them to be here. Anything they like, I want to take it away from them. I want to deliberately harass them.... "It's really like [gangs] having a weapon that they are allowed to display and intimidate people," Parris said. "If they have a pit bull, they may as well put a sign on their head saying, 'Come get me.' " Then there was:

“I want to deliberately harass the gangs. We will take their dogs; we will take their cars,”

Making it easy for Mayor Parris Think I'm coming down too hard on old Bad Rap? Did I singled them out unfairly? Self-inflicted wounds hurt the most, but let's run the list of the other "humane" organizations and supporters of SB 861. Bad Rap wasn't the only adventurer that took part in the SB 861 feeding-frenzy. Who else helped enable Mayor R. Rex Parris' fear-driven eradication campaign? Step out from the shadows and hang your heads in shame. . . . City and County of San Francisco Counties of Los Angeles, Napa, Tehama Cities of Apple Valley, Concord, Fremont, San Jose, Santa Rosa, West Hollywood Ace of Hearts Dog Rescue Action for Animals Animal Defense League Animal Issues Movement Animal Legislation Action Network Animal Place Animal Switchboard Association of Veterinarians for Animal Rights California Animal Control Directors Association California Association of Nurse Anesthetists California Lobby for Animal Welfare Contra Costa Humane Society Doris Day Animal League Friends of Long Beach Animals League of California Cities Peninsula Humane Society PETA United Activists for Animal Rights United Animal Nations Lessons learned? Mayor Parris is busy keeping his hate campaign alive. He doesn't have time to thank those that paved the way for him. I just hope that the members of some of these groups are beginning to understand the terrible repercussions of bad legislation. Innocent dog owners, and innocent dogs, are being hurt by SB 861. Good dogs are dying. There's no such thing as "just a little discrimination." Discrimination cannot be "retooled" into anything more acceptable. Love Does Not Discriminate Pit bull owners know it. Rottweiler owners know it. I believe most dog owners know it. Never, never let public servants -- or humane organizations -- in your community get away with it. _____________________________ Couple of other things: Noted with pleasure: Dogs White People Like Department of "forgot to mention before": Handy dandy contact information for Lancaster, CA

City Council phone number: 661-723-6019
email Mayor Parris at rrparris@cityoflancasterca.org

and, last but not least. . .

Report a hate crime in Lancaster, California (877)728-7322 (7-AT-PEACE)

Dog Owners Stand Up to Abuse of Power In Sioux City, Iowa

2009-01-23T16:11:00.004-05:00

First Blue Dog State Feist Award Ever!

Dog Owners Stand Up to Abuse of Power in Sioux City, Iowa Just say no to intimidation Rick and Deborah Borg, pit bull-owning residents of Sioux City, Iowa, spoke out against Sioux City's breed ban and testified against it during city council meetings. They encouraged their friends to do likewise.

In other words, they took part in the democratic process.

City officials, apparently, mailed threatening letters, drafted a "hit list" that sent Animal Control officers to some dog owners' homes to check if the dogs had been licensed and took other actions against residents that testified against the proposal.

Unequal enforcement of the law is a bad, bad thing

By its own admission, Sioux City's dog licensing compliance rate is only 10 - 15%. Unlicensed dogs are NOT a "pit bull" thing in Sioux City.

Wise public servants struggle against the mere appearance of retaliatory tactics and negative profiling of segments of their own constituencies.

Letter to Des Moisnes

The Borgs wrote to William Angrick, ombudsman for the State of Iowa:

"We would like to have your agency investigate this matter and a report be issued including any recommended remedial action."

Good. Let's hope the Borg letter touches off all kinds of remedial action.

May I have the envelope, please?

Meanwhile, Blue Dog State offers its first ever Feist Award to Rick and Deborah Borg. Go forth and take no shit, Rick and Deborah.

Running a close second for the award, by the way: just about the entire State of Montana. Rep. Robyn Driscoll's fear-based and uneducated proposal to ban "pit bulls" from the State of Montana met with the overwhelming scorn it deserved during a hearing at the state capital.

In attempting to defend her proposal, Driscoll dragged out that miserable piece of Humane Society of the United States mythology: "The vast majority of people that are attracted to pit bulls are attracted to the macho reputation of the animal as a living weapon."

Driscoll's proposal required the death of any dog accused of being an unregistered pit bull in the State of Montana.

And Driscoll thinks pit bulls are living weapons???

Heh.

What does she see when she looks in the mirror? _______________________________________________

[original post date of following article: November 24, 2008]

Persecution of Pit Bull Owners Public servants retaliate against breed ban opponents Participation in the democratic process lands dog owners on the shit list Fear and loathing in Sioux City, Iowa Earlier this year Sioux City, Iowa joined the list of pathetic U. S. municipalities that allow hysteria and political pandering to drive public policy. Sioux City showed that negative profiling is alive and well in the heartland when it moved to ban "pit bulls". Mocha, the pup pictured above, isn't welcome anymore. Incredibly, if members of Mocha's family went to a town council meeting and testified against the breed ban -- exercised their right to freedom of speech, in other words -- they unwittingly made themselves a target for special, selective attention from the city clerk's office, and animal control. Sioux City? Not pet-friendly.

Sioux City already required cat licensing, and it has a limit law in place that allows residents a maximum of two dogs per household. Anti-pet and anti-pet owner ordinances are traditional, it seems. Owners of Sioux City dogs accused of criminal pit bull resemblance, and unable to prove that their dog is NOT a pit bull, have ten calendar days to find a way to get their dogs out of the city. That's assuming the dog owner can afford the impoundment fees and other costs associated with seizure, impoundment and prosecution on charges of looking like a pit bull. Because the first thing the city does is take the dog away from his or her owner. If owners don't have the cash, or don't have a place outside the city limits to stash the dog, then Sioux City will kill him. Or her. Heartless in the heartland: "pit bulls" are born guilty Alleged pit bulls are presumed guilty of the crime of being a "pit bull." The burden of proof lands on the dog owner -- who must somehow "prove" to the city manager's satisfaction that their dog is not a "pit bull." Good luck with that, owners of short-haired, medium-to-large, mixed breed or otherwise unpedigreed dogs. Cause you're fresh out of "proof." It doesn't exist. Putting the squeeze on veterinarians The AVMA veterinarian's oath doesn't include becoming a tool in the extermination of innocent dogs. Local vets balked at making breed determinations that will cause the deaths of their patients, and they're beginning to bail on the city's licensing program. We want to take care of the animals --we don't want to I.D. the ones that are supposed to be banned," said [Dr. David] Ray. Lesson learned: Vets involved in law enforcement are gonna have trouble sleeping at night when collaborating with animal control becomes unethical. Push came to shove pretty quickly in Sioux City.

Will Sioux City vets betray their clients' faith and trust? Or will they disengage themselves from breed profiling?

City clerk collects names, addresses

Elected officials in Sioux City have been going around, taking names.

The names and addresses of residents who testified before the city council against the breed ban were databanked by the city clerk's office. 28 households received an intimidating letter from the city clerk threatening them with a $750 fine for failure to license their dogs.

Only people who testified against the breed ban got a letter, even though--by its own admission--Sioux City's license compliance rate is a dismal 10 - 15%.

Chilling effect on the democratic process?

Ya think???

Sioux City's elected officials apparently thought that abuse of power is okay if the victims are just pit bull owners. Maybe they thought no one would care what happens to drug dealers and gangbangers like Mocha's owners.

But trying to shut down opposition through selective enforcement of the law is a recipe for tyranny.

The Iowa State Constitution includes a Bill of Rights. Section 20 reads. . .

The people have the right freely to assemble together to counsel for the common good; to make known their opinions to their representatives and to petition for a redress of grievances.

So what the hell happened in Sioux City? What were Mayor Mike Hobart and City Manager Paul Eckert thinking?

Rights and liberties in Sioux City

In Iowa, cities with a population in excess of 29,000 people -- like Sioux City -- are required to maintain an independent local civil and human rights agency.

The Sioux City municipal code includes a human rights section, and the Sioux City Commission on Human Rights in on 6th Street.

Dog lovers in Sioux City need to have a conversation with the Human Rights Commission.

Abuse of power, retaliation, intimidation. . .is the daily dose for pit bull owners.

But that don't make it right. I'm not okay with any of this, and I'm betting plenty of Sioux City residents aren't either.

HSUS Sics Private Security Firm on Dog Owners

2009-01-18T15:39:00.001-05:00

HSUS Sics Private Security Firm on Dog Owners Florida's "humane" war on pit bull owners is the best money can buy. Wayne Pacelle kicks the killing machine up a notch Old news: HSUS rules the world when it comes to "training" the public on how to spot a dog fighter. Here's John Goodwin, HSUS Dogfight Czar, running through his paces. Lowering the bar on probable cause The strategy here is to convince the public, including judges who sign warrants, that the presence of multiple pit bulls, springpoles and other so-called fighting paraphernalia, etc., is probable cause for search warrants. HSUS needs to make it easier to search the property of pit bull owners and breeders and ~~kill~~ rescue their dogs. Mouthing off on the internet: grounds for search and seizure ? Then there's words like "game." Debates on innumerable pit bull b-boards rage on (and on and on) about "gameness", what it means, how to identify it, whether its really dead. . . Whatever. What's in a word? But regardless of your choice of language, get this straight, pit bull owners: Czar Goodwin is no philosopher, and no breed historian. His expertise is store bought and paper thin. He don't give a shit about what you meant, or how much of what you said was bullshit. Goodwin is no constitutional scholar, and HSUS isn't much on freedom of speech. Use of the wrong words could get you in all kinds of trouble, now that HSUS' John Goodwin is calling the shots. Florida's Attorney General rises to HSUS bait In late December, Bill McCollum -- a Republican, an ex Naval officer and staunch conservative who ran for Attorney General with a "making Florida a safer place to live, work, and raise a family" campaign slogan -- announced his support for the expansion of HSUS's $5000 reward for phoned-in dogfight allegations. "Easy and anonymous" route to neighborhood safety That's what McCollum says he's after. So how come I don't feel any safer? I have a problem when private corporations like the Humane Society of the United States -- ones with zero public responsibility -- get into the law enforcement biz. Out of control private warriors operating in the Middle East are a national disgrace. Do we really want private contractors operating in the domestic sector, too? Commercial law enforcement HSUS promotes financial incentives for raiding the homes and kennels of pit bull breeders. Outfits like In the Line of Duty -- heavily dependent on HSUS doctrine -- make dogfight raids seem like a lucrative image enhancement tool. Best Friend's general counsel, Russ Mead, makes asset forfeiture in dogfight prosecutions sound like a no-brainer. Does Best Friends Animal Society see the country as a Walmart, ripe for pick-and-don't-pay, too? HSUS subcontracts out the wet work Dude, we've already got privatized law enforcement, triggered by anonymous tips and driven by profit motive. Not cool. But when HSUS hired Norred & Associates, a private security firm that specializes in "fighting corporate enemies" and turned them loose on the citizens of Florida (and Georgia) things got beyond weird. When Floridians dial that HSUS dogfight tip hotline number, the one that Attorney General McCollum thinks is such a great thing, they won't get the Attorney General's office. They won't get a public servant at all. Persons wishing to make anonymous accusations of felonious activity will be connected to an individual employed by a for-profit, private security company employed by the Humane Society of the United States. The for-profit private security company employed by HSUS will take the ball from there. And guess whose instructions they'll be following. Anybody else feel a headache coming on ? Cause I'm getting a ringing in my ears that won't quit. It sounds like alarm bells, or maybe air raid sirens. None of this is good. Not for dogs, not for dog owners. Not for democracy. Pit bull owners are the coalmine canaries of the animal owning world. Right now, they've got nowhere to run and nowhere to hide. Pit bull owners are prime examples of what happens when a society that thinks its governed by laws is hoodwinked by lawless extremists like the Humane Society of the United States.

Proposed: 501(c)3's should be regulated like pet dealers or commercial kennels.
	Thumbs up! tax reporting status is meaningless in this context.
	Thumbs down! NFP's are just different. Hell if I can explain it.
	Licensing and regulation of facilities selling animals is unnecessary. Period.
	License and regulate any person or facility selling any animal under any circumstances.

pollcode.com free polls

How will it all end? With a bang, or a whimper?
	BFAS, in a fit of shame and embarrassment, will force Pet Airlines to mend their ways.
	Pet Airlines is in it for the money, and will walk away from the flying pit bull market rather than fix the problem.
	After thinking it over, Pet Airlines will completely refuse service for "pit bulls" and Presas, but also 30 other breeds and types. Hey, why not?
	Other (go for it! -- use the blog's comments section)

Free polls from Pollhost.com