HSUS Launches Onslaught Against Dog Owners

I am the writer | 1/30/09 | John Yates

[eaglerock814]

HSUS Off To Fast Start In 2009, But Dog Owners Triumph In VA And MT

Beware Bills Introduced In NJ, NY, ME, FL, MN, IL, CA, CO, VA, MT, RI And CT - Expect more In TX, MA, WI, MI, IN, OH, OK, AZ And NM

by JOHN YATES American Sporting Dog Alliance http://www.americansportingdogalliance.org asda@csonline.net

This article is archived at: http://eaglerock814.proboards107.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=general&thread=16

Dog owners will face unprecedented and potentially devastating challenges in 2009, and it will take dedication and commitment to protect our rights. Sitting on the sidelines simply is not an option. It will take standing up and making your voice count.

The radical Humane Society of the United States (HSUS), buoyed by the victories of 95% of the state and federal candidates it endorsed in the November general election, has struck quickly in 2009 with legislation in 12 states that would severely restrict the rights of dog owners. Our sources also tell us that HSUS-anointed legislation will be introduced shortly in at least nine more states.

HSUS has launched this full-court press in only three weeks, and dog owners must act quickly and decisively or they will be overwhelmed.

However, there is some good news. This week, dog owners won the first two rounds in Virginia and Montana with the sound defeat of mandatory spay/neuter and breed-specific legislation.

In Virginia, HSUS and People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals were strongly in support of Senate Bill 1151, which would have mandated the spaying or neutering of any dog taken to an animal shelter for a second time. The legislation was killed this week by the Senate Agriculture, Conservation and Natural Resources Committee by an 8-6 vote.

This bill would have had a strong impact on hunting dogs, especially, and would have opened the door to many animal rights group kidnappings of hunting and companion dogs. Animal rights group kidnappings are becoming more common, and their goal is to take dogs to distant animal shelters were they will be euthanized.

In Montana, HSUS attempted to ram through breed-specific legislation after its usual media bombardment of inflammatory news stories, but it was killed in committee by a 17-1 vote after a reported 150 dog owners attended a hearing to voice opposition. Only three people spoke in favor of the bill.

While breed-specific legislation most often is seen as about “pit bulls,” many local ordinances have extended it to several other breeds ranging from Rottweilers to German shepherds. Moreover, the American Sporting Dog Alliance is concerned about this kind of legislation because we see hunting breeds as next on the list of HSUS targets. Animal rights group websites frequently and falsely portray hunting dogs as vicious, some states are seriously considering banning or restricting hunting with hounds, and all hunting breeds were targeted specifically in failed federal legislation just two years ago.

HSUS-inspired legislation introduced in 10 other states would affect all people who raise dogs. Those states are New York, New Jersey, Maine, Florida, Minnesota, Colorado, Illinois and California. Legislation also will be introduced soon in Texas, Massachusetts, Wisconsin, Ohio, Michigan, Indiana, Oklahoma, New Mexico and Arizona.

In late breaking developments, Rhode Island Sen. John J. Tassoni Jr. (D-Smithfield) introduced a bill this week that would prohibit tethering a dog outdoors, unless protection is offered by a dog house or building. However, some ambiguity in the use of defined terms in Senate Bill 23 could be interpreted as prohibiting outdoor kenneling of any kind. Two bills also were introduced in Connecticut that appear to ban tethering. SB 122 was sponsored by Sen. Edith Prague (D-Columbia) and HB 5798 was sponsored by Rep. Diana Urban (D-Stonington).

The American Sporting Dog Alliance is taking an active and aggressive role to defeat this legislation, which takes aim at people who raise dogs as an avocation and reflects the HSUS agenda of working toward the complete elimination of domestic animal ownership in America. We are urging dog owners to join with us to work to defeat this dangerous legislation.

Please follow this link to read the full report and a synopsis of the legislation that has been introduced in each state: http://eaglerock814.proboards107.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=general&thread=16 .

Please visit us on the web at http://www.americansportingdogalliance.org . Our email is asda@csonline.net .

PLEASE CROSS-POST AND FORWARD THIS REPORT TO YOUR FRIENDS

[DieHard the Hunter]

> Go F yourself, Mr. Self Righteous.

You first.

[YellowRoseofTx]

I never bred him, but who are you to tell me that it would be wrong?

I didn't tell you it was wrong, I would never do that. And in a case like yours where the puppies would have been wanted, I think it would have been great. I'm sorry, you took my comments different than I intended.

I have had more mixed breeds than pure breeds in my life, usually rescue dogs. I've taken in many dogs that were unwanted and found good homes for them on my own.

Right now I have a little rescue dog that had been abused and took him a while to trust us, but he is wonderful, and two registered dogs that are just as wonderful.

I volunteered for one of our local shelters and it breaks my heart to see so many unwanted animals, and some very abused. Not everyone should be pet owners because they don't care about them or know how to deal with animals.

When there are too many dogs (and cats) that they end up in shelters or run wild, then too many are breeding that shouldn't be.

[huck von finn]

That’s sweet. I’ve taken my dogs on trails in the West where they get to meet other dogs. They love it. But there are places where dogs are not so well cared for, and it’s probably best that a dog who sees the shelter more than once is neutered/spayed, unless it’s a case of a well cared for dog who escapes the confines of a fence or something.

[ApplegateRanch]

Not until you add me to the plonker list, Wanker.

[huck von finn]

I guess the part that threw me off was the "Don't allow uncontrolled breeding" part...?

Who wouldn't object to uncontrolled dog breeding? The government shouldn't control it, but the folks doing it do and can control it.

[DieHard the Hunter]

> Not until you add me to the plonker list, Wanker.

Do you think you’ve earned it? Or are you just a wannabe Plonker? Either way, you can get knotted.

[huck von finn]

As a former breeder & exhibitor, I have to say that on the surface this is reasonable. Yes, most of the dogs we sold had enforcible neuter agreements written into the contracts, the exceptions being to other known breeders and involving show/breeding quality animals. That said, I have known, and known of other, breeders who had valuable animals stolen and then later ended up in shelters. Pre-chipping, it was devasting to some breeding programs.

Then be more careful about the people you let adopt puppies. The dogs aren't commodities--"valuable animals"-- they are family.

[ApplegateRanch]

Then be more careful about the people you let adopt puppies

We were; OTHERS weren't. And it wasn't the adoptors that were the problem, it was third party "activists" that caused others some trouble.

We never had a problem.