|
The problems of puppy mills, puppy brokers and irresponsible breeders are receiving more media coverage. The public is becoming
more educated on the importance of buying a puppy/dog from ethical, responsible breeders in order to avoid both the physical
and psychological problems associated with dogs from poor sources. Everyone selling puppies proclaims himself or herself to
be a responsible breeder, even those selling puppies from puppy mills! It is up to the buyer to determine whether or not someone
trying to sell them a puppy is a responsible breeder.
Top Puppy Mill States (Fact)
There are seven states that are known as puppymill states because they have the majority of the puppymills
in the country. They are: Missouri, Nebraska, Kansas, Iowa, Arkansas, Oklahoma and Pennsylvania.
|
THE MYTH OF OVER POPULATION IN REGARD TO SHELTER ANIMALS |
There are dogs, puppies, cats and kittens
killed every week in this country’s animal shelters. These deaths are a sad and inexcusable fact.
To listen
to the media reports, the number of animals in shelters is all the fault of dogs/cats being bred. If you breed, then more
will be killed in shelters. If you buy a dog or cat then you are supporting breeders and one more will die in a shelter. The
animal rights movement promotes that breeders are evil. To allow your dog/cat to reproduce makes you lower than dirt. Heaven
forbid if you actually planned the event. Wanting to purchase a pet with a certain look, behavior and wanting it for a specific
purpose makes you a bad person. According to the media and animal rights activists, over population (breeding) is the reason
for all of the shelter deaths.
A large portion of the general public has been lead to believe these theories. These
are only theories because reliable, credible statistics have not and are not being kept at an overwhelming majority of shelters
as to why animals are being surrendered. There are some sections of this country that are importing dogs from foreign countries
because of a lack of local dogs available for adoption. Large numbers in shelters seem to be regional not necessarily national.
Because of the media and animal rights movements there are numerous counties throughout this country that are requiring
mandatory neutering or spaying of ALL dogs and cats in private homes as well as those in shelters. I do feel that all animals
adopted from shelters should be neutered or spayed. The only way to be allowed to keep an intact animal (whether you breed
or not) is to pay outrageous yearly breeding or kennel fees. This applies to Granny’s little poodle who is never allowed
out without Granny, to breeders trying to improve their breed, to breeders striving to save a rare breed from extinction,
to hunters and their hunting dogs. Some areas have already passed laws requiring mandatory neutering and spaying of all privately
owned animals.
My main question has always been -- Why are there dogs and cats at animal shelters in the first place?
According to Chief Cathy Hartley, Granville County Animal Control, “The main reason for animals in our shelter
is irresponsible pet owners. It doesn’t matter if it is a mix breed mutt or a high dollar purebred. It doesn’t
matter if it belongs to a drug dealer on one street or a professional living on another. It’s irresponsible owners”.
I completely agree with Officer Hartley.
If the owners of those animals surrendered at shelters would accept responsibility
for those animals then the shelter would not have to deal with the numbers that have to be killed. Those numbers would not
then be deceptively used to impact the lives of responsible animal owners through animal rights backed mandatory neuter spay
and breed specific legislation. Breed specific legislation is another whole can of worms!
Just a quick note: there
is a huge difference between animal rights and animal welfare. Animals don’t have rights; people do, in my opinion.
But, people do have responsibilities towards animals. Animal rights activists generally believe that humans should not use
animals in any way. That includes having pets (slavery is their term), for food, research or any other use or association.
There should be no domestic animals. Animal welfare is where people feel responsibility to care for, use and live with animals
humanely. Please be sure of the agendas (often hidden) of those organizations you choose to support. Some of the animal rights
groups have been determined to be domestic terrorists by the FBI. Other AR groups, while not actively participating in terrorist
activities, financially support the groups that promote violent activities. You have to dig to find the answers. Make sure
you are supporting what you think you are supporting.
If you choose to neuter or spay your animal then they will not
reproduce. If you choose not to neuter or spay then keep your animal home and don’t allow it to roam. Many cities, communities
and counties have leash laws currently on the books. These existing laws need to be enforced before new laws are written.
If your animal isn't allowed to roam it will not be randomly breeding, bothering your neighbor, their property or livestock.
Roaming dogs, whether in a pack or a single, can frighten people, fight with other dogs, kill livestock or other dogs or cats,
injure people and destroy property. It isn’t the dogs or cats fault, they are just being who they are, but it is sure
the fault of their owner. Ever wonder what happened to that dog or cat of yours that never came home? If lucky, it did end
up at the shelter. Maybe it was smeared across a road somewhere or left to die in a ditch. Or perhaps someone initiated the
three S’s – shoot, shovel and shut-up. Again, not the animals fault but definitely the fault of the owner.
Did
your dog or cat have babies that you want to take to the shelter? Have you tried to find them homes? Run ads? Ask friends
or neighbors if they want a new pet? Taking them to the shelter should be your last option not your first choice. The shelter
has enough to do without irresponsible owners contributing to the problems. Is your pet sick or old? Does it cost too much
to care for it? Did your kids grow up and now you just don’t want the thing? Did you take on more than you can handle?
Did you make the wrong breed choice? Do you work 60 hours a week and don’t have time? Did the animal’s owner die
and it ended up at a shelter? Does it have behavior problems? Did it pee on the floor; again? Did it jump on the kids? Or
does it bark all night? Did it get too big? Turn out to be the wrong color or shed? Again, the animal didn’t cause the
problem but, in most cases, the owner’s irresponsibility to solve the problem caused the animal to end up at a shelter.
These are but some of the reasons why animals end up being abandoned or surrendered to shelters. While some situations
are legitimate reasons for surrender, they are the exception not the rule. A shelter should be the considered only after you
have exhausted all other paths.
Most of the reasons for surrender seem to cluster around behavior/training issues,
lack of animal care knowledge and owners not knowing what the resources are available that can help. Of course, you will still
have a certain segment of people who just don’t give a dang.
For those people who are at a loss of which direction
to turn, there are people out there that can help. This is where a call to your local shelter should be one of your first
moves. Shelter staffs are often a wealth of information. Often they can offer suggestions that may solve the very problem
you are having. They usually are aware of trainers or instructors who will be able to help you with your problems. Local humane
societies can often point you in proper directions. Local training clubs and parks & recreation departments often have
classes or trainers they can refer you to. Talk with your veterinarian. If you don’t have a vet then call around to
the different offices. There are numerous rescue groups available to assist in one way or another. You have to ask for the
assistance. No one is going to know what you need if you don’t ask. If you don’t accept the responsibility for
seeking solutions to problems then you become just another irresponsible owner whose animal will, probably, eventually die
an early death. Often at a shelter, often giving fuel to the myth that over population (breeding) is the sole reason for the
numbers of animals in shelter.
Owner irresponsibility is far reaching. Not only does irresponsibility impact the animals
themselves, but it also impacts neighbors, the community at large while at the same time overburdening shelters and rescue
groups. Irresponsibility also impacts the rights of others to responsibly use and enjoy their own animals by giving fuel to
the animal rights movement. Not only are you doing a disservice to yourself and your own animals, you have become a pawn in
the animals rights agenda.
Linda Tilley North Carolina Responsible Animal Owners Alliance February
2006 copyright NCRAOA
|
Rural people's concerns terribly troubling Some basic civil liberties at stake Mesabi Daily News Last updated: Saturday, March 24th, 2007 08:50:53 PM
|
|
Tuesday night’s meeting at the Wilbert Cafe in Cotton was grassroots citizenship at its best.
However, unfortunately, the issues raised, if fully substantiated, involve county government most definitely not at its
best. In this case it’s law enforcement and the Humane Society out of Golden Valley, Minn., that St. Louis County contracts
with to handle alleged animal abuse cases.
About 70 rural area residents attended a gathering with County Commissioners Keith Nelson and Dennis Fink on the issue.
We applaud the two commissioners for responding to residents’ concerns and doing a lot of listening.
We believe this issue definitely warrants a full county hearing with all parties involved in attendance. That wasn’t
the case Tuesday night as no one from the Sheriff’s Department or the Humane Society were there.
The stories told by residents raise serious concerns about possible improper and excessive action taken by a law enforcement
officer and a Golden Valley Human Society representative.
The citizens’ claims include:
• Livestock and companion animals being taken for no reason.
• The integrity of homeowners being verbally questioned.
• The entering of homes and property without prior consent.
The major incident that triggered this meeting is particularly troubling.
Wade Hanson of the Golden Valley Humane Society traveled to Kelsey last Nov. 22 to investigate a report of animal neglect.
However, he went to the wrong farm, which is owned by Mark and Loretta Bickford, entered the house and left a “Minnesota
animal welfare statue compliance warning” in the entryway.
The Bickfords, who have horses, dogs and fowl, paid for a veterinarian to inspect all their animals. All were found to
be healthy and well maintained.
Animal abuse is something that should outrage all caring and humane people. We have reported on it before, even broke a
major story on it in the Kelsey area just a couple of years ago. And it sickens us.
But government abuse of people’s rights is also outrageous. We also find that to be terribly odorous.
If these claims are true — and we have heard no reason to believe otherwise — then the very sanctity of private
property ownership and individual civil liberties was severely violated.
That cannot be allowed to go unchallenged. And that cannot be allowed to happen again in any similar form. |
Animal care visits raise ire in county property rights dispute Litman, Bickford sound off on investigations, incident Charles Ramsay Last updated: Sunday, April 22nd, 2007 10:09:49 PM
|
|
COTTON — A dispute on animal care and authorities’ visits to central St. Louis County rural properties the
past several months has some residents squared off with authorities investigating any violation allegations.
The issue was brought to a head at a March 20 meeting in Cotton, when about 70 residents gathered regarding visits to properties
by state humane investigator Wade Hanson and sheriff’s Sgt. Marleen Hall. The two have been following up on complaints
received about care of animals at rural properties.
Sheriff Ross Litman in general defended his personnel and the visits, which are in response to specific allegations. Area
resident Mark Bickford has said he has not been given a complaint on any treatment of his animals, and disputes both authorities’
contentions of how his animals are kept, and what he says was unauthorized entry into his home.
Several items Litman wanted to clear up in a recent phone discussion on the situation was that St. Louis County does not
contract with any animal shelter or humane society in Minnesota in the animal care visits, and state humane investigator Wade
Hanson is not a department member.
Hanson, from Golden Valley, works with the Minnesota Federated Humane Society, a group of human societies, is one of two
such agents in the state, and does have statewide authority under Statute 343 like any Minnesota peace officer to respond
to complaints on animal treatment. In most cases, he notifies local law enforcement before responding and takes a veterinarian
along, and he has a good working relationship with his department’s personnel, Litman said.
“The man has got a high level of expertise,’’ he noted, adding that Hanson was a great resource statewide
and in the county on such matters.
Hanson has the ability to place animals in shelters or with humane societies, upon voluntary surrender or else seizure,
if animals’ well-being is at issue. The majority of complaints he investigates involve domestic animals, not livestock.
“He’s done a very good job of investigating these complaints in St. Louis County, and working in concert with
local authorities,’’ Litman said.
There is a perception that authorities are showing up on rural properties doing pro-active investigations, but they are
responding to specific complaints, the sheriff said. They receive dozens of animal cruelty or neglect complaints each year,
but “very rarely are animals seized or voluntarily surrendered,’’ Litman added. “Our goal is to gain
compliance.’’
Animals taken from a property are placed in shelters for better care, and over time may be adopted by an outside person
for a fee to help cover costs like spaying and neutering.
Another perception out in the public is that authorities should receive permission or else be invited on to a property.
But authorities are doing a criminal complaint investigation, and “we don’t always announce our presence,’’
he said.
Authorities responding to a complaint have to follow the law, and the state and federal constitutions; they typically do
not enter homes or outbuildings such as barns or sheds, but do have the right to observe in plain view. If a homeowner is
present and says they deny law enforcement access to the property, then the steps through the search warrant process are done.
Only if a person’s life or well-being is in jeopardy or evidence may well be destroyed, do officers do otherwise, he
explained.
“There’s been some serious allegations of illegal searches,” Litman noted, and in the cases that have
been brought to his attention and that he’s reviewed, both Wade Hanson and staff of his office “acted appropriately.’’
In the case of a visit by authorities to the property of Mark and Loretta Bickford, it was claimed Hanson had the wrong
address, and the wrong name was written on a card Hanson left, telling that he had been there. “He was at the correct
address of the specific complaint that had been left,’’ Litman said.
When Hanson was done, he left the card between doors to the home on the porch, but did not enter the house, the sheriff
said.
There can be some disagreement between residents and others what is considered proper food and water care for animals,
and “people have great passion’’ for their creatures, he added. But, there have been cases where conditions
were deplorable “and clearly a violation of the law.’’
Mark Bickford says no one was home Nov. 22 when Wade Hanson came to his property in Kelsey Township. An animal welfare
compliance warning was left inside his back door, which is inside a porch, where there is an entryway to his basement as well.
The warning was not addressed to him, but to his neighbors, “Tim and Annette,’’ who are nearby neighbors.
Law enforcement had supplied the address, regarding a complaint of 22 dogs running loose. The dogs don’t run loose,and
belonged to the neighbors, he explained. Apparently some neighbors of the neighbors up from the Twin Cities for hunting season
had complained of the dogs barking. “It was a false complaint,’’ Bickford said, “without foundation.’’
In the first November visit, the Bickfords were told they had illegal housing for dogs, horses and fowl, and two horses
needed hoof trimming. Bickford contends that state statute said natural or manmade housing can be used. What they wanted was
loafing sheds, for 24-hour, daily access to shelter. Hutches were to be built for rabbits, but the rabbits were for butchering
and have been put in the freezer, he said. But Bickford says he has several draft horses, big animals that need to be in stalls,
which he uses for farming. “My animals have always met at least minimum Minnesota state statute,’’ he said.
He has put up an addition to his barn in the process, which he said they were planning to do beforehand. And, authorities
did not tell them what they needed to have done regarding the barn.
They were told that ducks they have on hand to eat flies in summer needed water to swim in in winter, including a heated
pool, Bickford asserted.
There were subsequent monthly visits to his property in December, January and February, and in the December visit, “they
assumed we were Tim and Annette,’’ he added. At that point, “I said to them you were trespassing.’’
On a January visit, “they questioned Loretta why we had so many animals,’’ including peacocks, golden
pheasants, draft horses, and other horses and dogs and other animals, he said.
He had two veterinarians come out to inspect his animals and property, one of whom said he found all animals healthy, well
fed and content, and that the Bickfords take good care of their animals.
Bickford also had witnesses on hand at a called-for February meeting as well.
He has never been given a complaint, “nothing in writing saying I was doing anything wrong,’’ he said.
Bickford, asked if he felt he has been treated unfairly, answered, “Yes. Definitely.’’ He contends authorities
are “really impressed with the power they have and enjoy using it.’’
He sent Litman a certified letter on all the incidents, and Litman has called him recently suggesting to meet with him,
he said.
Litman said when animal complaints are investigated, authorities take proper precautions to stop the spread of any communicable
diseases between properties, and they were properly responding to complaints.
While it may seem intimidating for authorities to come on to someone’s property, “the main thing is to bring
people into compliance,’’ Litman said.
Could personnel have done a better job spreading the word about what they were trying to accomplish? “Probably so,’’
he conceded, but insisted authorities were “doing a really good job.’’
There is a system in place to lodge a complaint regarding whatever severity in animal well-being cases, and residents can
call 911; or 218-749-6010 for north, or 218-727-8770 for south, he said.
Charles Ramsay can be reached at charles.ramsay@mx3.com. To read this story and comment on it online go to www.virginiamn.com.
|
"Now, we have initiated a 50-state strategy that aims
to place HSUS staff in every state within the next few years. The state representatives will develop state-specific agendas
to advance legislation and regulatory reforms, corporate campaigns, and other priorities of local or national concern".
Wayne Pacelle HSUS's President and CEO April 2007
Be a responsible animal owner!
|