It’s another bad grade for the America Kennel Club and the current rubber-stamp system of inspecting breeding operations. The Humane Society of the United States reported yesterday on a breeding kennel in Mississippi, where a former American Kennel Club champion dog was founding living in feces.
Wild Bill, an Australian Cattle Dog had been living with 60 other dogs on what is being described as a puppy mill.
In the report on his Humane Nation blog, Wayne Pacelle states:
Some of the worst facilities wave around their AKC credentials like a badge of honor, and draw consumers away from better sources of dogs, such as animal shelters and rescue groups and responsible breeders.
As is the case in greyhound racing, when a dog is no longer making money, it becomes disposable for the puppy-mill industry.
We need a system of regular inspections by qualified inspectors in every state in the nation.PACK MENTALITY BLOG: Compassion - teamed with Science and Logic
The spokesperson for the Westminster Kennel Club just admitted on the Today Show that the new breeds for this year’s dog show are nothing more than a product of mixing breeds together.
So what does that make the dogs? Say it with me …. “mixed breeds” or “mutts.”
Of course the club would never put the system in these terms, although it is factually correct. And of course all breeds have resulted from mixing different dogs together to come up the physical appearance of the current breeds. The process might have started years ago – even thousands of years ago for particular breeds, but the breeds of dog that Westminster and other kennel clubs promote are nothing more than wolf-hybrids.
All dogs are wolf-mutts.
The shows and the kennel clubs and their promotions are actually nothing more than a promotional system to drive the price of puppies. They want people to watch the shows and follow groups like the AKC to popularize the breeds and promote the purchasing of more puppies.
Don’t fall for it. The shelter dog is worth just as much. In fact, the shelter dogs are in many cases the survivors of a horrible breeding system. The breed standards are actually detrimental to dogs.
I’ll have more on this soon. And also coming right up will be my take on the new greyhound racing report from GREY 2K and the ASPCA. There’s a lot of animal welfare news flooding cyberspace and the airways out right now.PACK MENTALITY BLOG: Compassion - teamed with Science and Logic
The American Kennel Club has been at the forefront of opposition to improved breeding regulations across the nation, measures that could shut down more puppy mills.
But of course, the AKC receives funding through breeding operations. The more breeders, the more money. So when a state like North Carolina introduces a bill that might close down breeding operations that do not meet minimum standards of care, the AKC kicks its opposition into high gear.
The WRAL article I linked to yesterday included the following:
The bill would not apply to dogs being bred or kept as hunting dogs or show dogs and would only apply to breeders with 10 or more breeding females on the premises.
But the AKC has said it is unfair to regulate breeders more stringently than other dog owners, and it has objected to any state inspection of facilities.
True, the bill should regulate all breeders. But to suggest breeders would be regulated more stringently than “other dog owners” is categorically false. If a family was caught treating their pets the way puppy-mill breeders are allowed to treat their dogs, the family would be charged with animal cruelty every time.
The North Carolina General Assembly will reportedly debate another anti-puppy mill bill this session. The last two attempts in 2013 and 2014 were turned back by the NC Senate, after the bills cleared the House.
Governor Pat McCrory and his wife are in full support of breeding legislation. He commented on the issue in his recent State of the State address, stating “We have to protect our pets from abuse in puppy mills. I’m embarrassed that North Carolina is not giving basic good and water and shelter to our puppies.”
It is highly embarrassing that my home state still does not have protections in place for puppy mill dogs.
Rep. Jason Saine (R-Lincoln) sponsored the two most recent bills and WRAL out of Raleigh, NC is reporting he will try again.
“We have just an enormous amount of support from House Republicans. We’ve got a significant amount of support in the Senate, and I think that maybe this is the year that we’re going to come together and pass this bill.”
WRAL rightfully reminded readers recently that the No. 1 opponent of anti-puppy mill legislation is the American Kennel Club.PACK MENTALITY BLOG: Compassion - teamed with Science and Logic
While the progress has been too slow in the push to shut down puppy mills across the nation, I am pleased with the level of reporting I’m seeing. The media is doing a relatively good job of headlining the issue.
And rightfully so, the stories include the phrase “puppy mill.” When we see where someone has claimed there are no definitions for the phrase, that’s a red flag showing that individual is trying to block protections for the dogs suffering in puppy mills.
I will keep saying it over and over again. Quality breeders already meet or exceed the guidelines in current or proposed breeding regulations all across the nation.
Of late, we’re seeing an increased focus in media and we can only hope it will lead to more action on the part of legislative bodies. In Virginia, the Richmond Times-Dispatch reports legislation is making its way through the General Assembly.
The possible provisions include a ban on dog sales at flea markets and preventing stores from selling puppies shipped in from out-of-state puppy mills.
A push is underway in Kansas, to update the state’s Pet Animal Act, as a bill is under review in a House committee. Breeders and kennel operators are on an advisory board, but hopefully they will be working in the right direction.
There is a gas-chamber ban in the bill and a provision to make inspections of breeding operations a requirement. No shelter should use gas chambers and inspections are a vital tool for uncovering puppy mills and ensuring that other breeders are properly staying within the guidelines.
The WCF Courier reports some Iowa lawmakers are engaged in an effort to increase enforcement and inspections for large-scale breeding operations and to better-regulate these operations.
But there are red flags in this case. The article notes it is possible that current standards for cage sizes and flooring might be removed. And I’m not sure it means that purebred breeders will be receive special classification as “specialized breeders, in order to gain their support.”
These breeders would be required to supply annual veterinary records.
The AKC declined to be interviewed for the story and reportedly opposed a previous version of this current bill. The AKC typically opposes any new regulations on puppy mills.
The article reports the AKC argued “the legislation would unfairly restrict raising quality, healthy purebred dogs and would prohibit members from being involved in animal rescues.”
This argument flies in the face of reason. Ensuring the breeding dogs live in clean housing and receive proper food and water and care does nothing to negatively impact quality breeding operations.
We can’t let people get away with using completely illogical arguments that they just try to word as thoughtful – as lame as the statements are.PACK MENTALITY BLOG: Compassion - teamed with Science and Logic
I’m gonna keep hammering away at this, because every time I read about those opposing breeding regulations in states across the map, the same, tired, twisted mess keeps sinking to the bottom of the debate pond.
So let’s review the basic proposals and specific regulations – with the key follow-up question – WHO COULD BE AGAINST THAT?!
** HUMANE HOUSING: Usually, the proposals in state bills set minimum, reasonable standards for the size of cages where the breeding dogs are housed or set a space requirement that allows the dogs room enough to turn around freely and lay down comfortably. And of course the cages should be free of feces and other unhealthy conditions.
WHO COULD BE AGAINST THAT? – No reasonable person could opposed this provisions – PERIOD. The alternative is to allow breeders to force the dogs to live in horrible conditions.
** DAILY EXERCISE: The bills typically call for minimal amounts of time each day, when the dogs should be allowed to play or at least walk around a bit outside or within some open area.
WHO COULD BE AGAINST THAT? – No one with an ounce of compassion in their soul would really suggest dogs housed in breeding kennels should be kept in their cages 24/7. We’d never want pets in homes to live this way.
** CLEAN FOOD AND WATER: Self-explanatory.
WHO COULD BE AGAINST THAT? – The alternative would be dirty water and scummy food? Only a moron would not want the dogs to get clean food and water.
** VETERINARY CARE: Again, self-explanatory.
WHO COULD BE AGAINST THAT? – Of course, I can hear the pro-puppy mill types saying, “Nobody tells me what to do with my property. It’s just like my car, I change the oil when I want to.” And that pretty sums up where animals stand with the pro-puppy mill side.
** LIMITS ON THE NUMBER OF TIMES FEMALES SHOULD BE PREGNANT IN A GIVEN TIME FRAME: Some of the proposals I’ve seen include this regulation and it’s a good one. The females should be given time for their bodies to rest. They are not factory machines.
WHO COULD BE AGAINST THAT? – This, along with the other provisions, aids in the health and welfare of the dogs. It’s common sense and good veterinary science.
WHO IS FOR ALL OF THE ABOVE? – Animal welfare advocates and quality breeders and every single human with the ability to think logically and have compassion for animals.
Yes – quality breeders meet or exceed the standards of care being proposed across the nation. The only breeders who would be impacted are those that do not meet the minimums. And that’s the point – isn’t it?
I repeat – That’s the point, isn’t it?
And yet, we have groups like the AKC and others out fighting every bill to regulate dog breeding.PACK MENTALITY BLOG: Compassion - teamed with Science and Logic
The American Kennel Club continues to make statements that have no basis in logical thought or in facts – where breeding regulations are concerned.
One of the AKC’s primary arguments centers on the false premise that minimum standards of care and/or inspections will hurt breeders. But here’s the clinching argument: Good, quality breeders already meet or exceed the standards being proposed across the nation.
So it is the bad breeders – the puppy mills – that will face problems under new guidelines. This is the main issue after all. The AKC’s position leaks more than the BP Gulf Oil Gusher.
If a breeder is not taking their dogs in for veterinary care or never allows them play time outside of their cages or is not cleaning their cages or kennels, then that breeder should be shut down.
To suggest these minimum standards are too much, is showing support for puppy mills.
On the AKC website, the group states a new proposal in North Carolina – “Creates unprecedented new levels of regulation of private property ownership.” I cringe when I see animals put in the same category with sofas and subdivision lots.
WNCN reported on June 9 about the AKC’s efforts to speak out against NC Governor Pat McCrory’s proposal to move animal welfare enforcement to the NC Department of Public Safety. WNCN quoted from a letter sent by the AKC to North Carolina House members:
“The Governor’s recommendations would create unprecedented new regulation based on the ownership of private property, create new inefficiencies as responsibilities are shifted between departments, and do nothing to improve the well-being of animals.”
They are wrong about this notion of private property, as it about the welfare of living, feeling beings. They are wrong about the shift, as enforcement should be a law enforcement issue – naturally. And they are completely off base about the well-being of animals. Protecting dogs and cats in puppy and kitten mills is all about the well-being of animals.
I don’t know how one group can reach this level of being so wrong about this subject.PACK MENTALITY BLOG: Compassion - teamed with Science and Logic
We’ve read where the American Kennel Club is opposed legislation such as House Bill 930 in North Carolina because the group opposes setting a base number for how many dogs a breeder needs to have to be covered under these proposed anti-puppy mill laws.
The AKC has also expressed concerned that all dogs need to covered under guidelines of basic care.
So the group seems to be saying that it unacceptable to pass a law covering a limited number of breeders and that setting a cut-off number for the number of dogs on site or the number of litters or anything like that is wrong.
The group’s leaders can do this because they know other groups and most likely the AKC would strongly opposed any effort to regulate smaller backyard breeders or so-called hobby breeders or hunting-dog breeders.
I was really pleased to see that Real Sports with Bryant Gumbel has dipped into this issue of dog shows and breed standards – through the American Kennel Club and others – and horrible breeding practices in general.
PACK MENTALITY BLOG: Compassion - teamed with Science and Logic