Sunday, January 08, 2012

Politicians & Animal Rights vs the right to breed YOUR dogs

By intention I don't do much politics here- I am neither partisan or, mostly, interested enough. But does ANYONE pay attention to the fact that one socially conservative Republican presidential candidate, Rick Santorum, is in bed with HSUS, Wayne Pacelle, and the whole Animal Rights movement, and has been for many years? Worse, he seems to fly totally under the radar. If you care about hunting, or, especially, private dog breeding, Google “Santorum HSUS” or "Animal Rights" or even "Wayne Pacelle"...

A lot of nutty stuff left and right, approving and critical, is available, but some of real substance is up too. Many people think or comment "I'm against puppy mills." Fine, but much of the proposed legislation, like Governor Perry's below or some of Santorum's failed attempts, would not just ban commercial breeders (who in any case have the money to move, fight, rebuild their kennels in technical compliance, or otherwise evade). Such laws would have prohibited my breeding (all of five non- profit pre- homed unique sighthound litters so far), and/ or have stopped me from bringing over my entire hound family, including Ataika, Queen of the World, who we got and lived with for a month in Almaty-- she was among other things, including just IMPORTED (apparently inherently evil), under 6 months old. Think she would have been as social and civilized later?*

The very sane Bob Kane on Santorum's proposed 2005 PAWS bill:

"PAWS has virtually nothing to do with animal welfare or closing Animal Welfare Act "loopholes." It's a direct attack on U.S. hobby breeders, hunting dog owners and animal rescuers. PAWS federalizes hobby pet breeding."

And then there is his fellow Republican Rick Perry, who fails on dumbass grounds anyway but tends to pose as a red blooded western foe of bureaucracy. I call bullshit. From “HB1451 created a new state agency, allows for entry into a private residence without the owners presence, establishes a public database to include the private information of pet breeders, established a bounty fund for animal rights activists to report pet breeders to the Texas Department of Licensing and Regulation, and is a contradiction of the key values supposedly upheld by Gov. Perry. These bills were heavily backed by the H$U$, ASPCA, PETA, and other animal rights groups, and promote their agenda.”

Statist meddlers & "botherers" both...

The results can be seen in Continental European countries, where an unholy alliance of government and closed registry breed clubs can now decide who is born. A friend in Germany wrote:

"But here in Germany it is very difficult to breed with brindle salukis. I think you remember the brindle Metzlers dogs. They tried to get permission to breed their bitch Bahia, but in the shows they only got a "good" and that is not good enough for the breeding permissions."

Priceless unique genetic diversity is being lost for no demonstrable reason at all, and it CAN happen here-- intact dogs of my AKC and Saluki Club unacceptable bloodlines are in peril of compulsory sterilization in Albuquerque because of former (Democrat-- stupid knows no partisan boundaries) Mayor Marty Chavez's Orwellianly- named HEART regs. Longdogs and staghounds, types prized and run in New Mexico longer than (I suspect) the authors of such regulations, are mere worthless "mongrels" of course.

[Elaborated from a comment of mine at Atomic Nerds.]

*Meanwhile it seems it is OK for urban shelters to import strays from Mexico to meet the demand caused by the "birth dearth" apparently resulting from too much compulsory spay neuter in pc precincts-- look it up...


Retrieverman said...

Santorum is not just a puppy mill hysteric. He's the worst sort of catholic politician. He rails against sharia law, but he's dead on certain to bring the Christian version here. He's the kind the bible thumpers around here used to hate with a passion-- and now they are going into some unholy alliance with him in order to keep the Massachusetts Moderate Mormon from getting near the presidency.

I have a very visceral reaction toward Santorum, and I always have.

I don't care if he's semi-local.

I don't care if most people around here agree with him. I'm glad most people around here aren't running for president as the "Jesus candidate."

Steve Bodio said...

"Statist meddlers & "botherers" both..."

Kosmos said...

Very well said, Steve! He's a very scary man. I'm in Pennsylvania, so I know first hand. He didn't get to pass his PAWS law, but Ed Rendell managed to pass a similar law here in PA a few years back. BTW, love your quote from Machen, I think he is so unappreciated.

Kathy Bentzoni
Kosmos Chart Polski

Heather Houlahan said...

I'm a Pennsylvania citizen who helped show this smug little pratt the door. I also financed his public swindles with my state tax dollars, so, good times there.

Maybe voters in the rest of the country should have a look at how well he served the citizens of the Commonwealth as a Senator.

He is consistent though. He thinks the gubmint should be all up in everybody's genitals, whether you are a human or a dog.* Because he's for freedom, natch.

*But not if your name is "Santorum" and you NEED an abortion, unlike everybody else who just wants one for whimsy, see.

BorderWars said...

The Obama Administration backs the PUPS bill which federalizes anyone with one intact bitch and/or a website.

Talk about meddling and bothersome.

Steve Bodio said...

Santorum and Perry are Republicans, Chavez was a Democrat, Rendell an Obama- backing Dem who is also a gun control advocate. I heartily dislike them all. PAWS, HEART, and PUPS are all abominations.

I lean small l libertarian localist tinged green, admittedly an occasionally conflicted balancing act, informed by my background as everything from a Catholic school boy to an evolutionary biologist to a gun nut, and I dislike a lot about both parties as currently configured.

My guiding principle tends toward leave me to hell alone. My big subject is the Old Ways; the necessary "memes" of humans acting, as they always have--"animals make us human"-- with their partners of other species.

Serious animal breeders and trainers in both parties should work to throw all the bastards who threaten these ways out. Vote against them whenever they run, and-- it is more effective I suspect-- clean your own houses, so they don't get nominated in the first place.

Heather Houlahan said...

HR 835 applies the AWA only to people who sell more than 50 puppies a year. It does not "federalize" anyone with an intact bitch and/or a website.

Retrieverman said...

Yep. Obama backs this monstrosity, too.

It looks like the German dog fancy let the AR loons give them absolute power. If the AKC were smart, it would do the same. Lots of these mandatory spay/neuter do exempt dogs that are AKC or registered with an "approved" registry.

No wonder they are so keen on importing breeds. When I was over there I saw a ton of golden retrievers that looked like they had all been brought over from American gun dog lines,

Puppy mills are bad things, but there is no way to effectively regulate them without destroying whatever chance we have to keep these breeds from falling apart. Law always protects those with institutional power, so the animal rights loons and the closed registry fools will always get what they want-- even if they both hate each other.

It's kind of like how in the health care reform bill, unions that provided their members with Cadillac placs were exempted and the health insurance companies got a mandate that requires everyone to purchase it.

Retrieverman said...

Correction: Cadillac plans didn't get exempted from the tax, but they almost did.

BorderWars said...

Interesting, that article doesn't mention a 50 puppy trigger. Misleading.

Here's the relevant text of HR 835:
‘(B) HIGH VOLUME RETAIL BREEDER- The term ‘high volume retail breeder’ means a person who, in commerce, for compensation or profit--
‘(i) has an ownership interest in or custody of 1 or more breeding female dogs; and
‘(ii) sells or offers for sale, via any means of conveyance (including the Internet, telephone, or newspaper), more than 50 of the offspring of such breeding female dogs for use as pets in any 1-year period.

I don't find that much of a consolation. Not only for the alarmist "they could lower the number any time" stance but for the vague language of "ownership interest in or custody" ... this seems to directly target co-ownership arrangements which are popular in the show community.

Would the co-owner in possession of one bitch qualify for license and inspection if the hub breeder and all their other co-owners produce 50 puppies in total; would each have to pay for the license, etc.?

I'm not sure why a bill would need language about 1 breeding female if the target is the supposed puppy mill.

Just Another Savage! said...

I'd like to post this on my Blog by your permission.
Much Obliged
Audwin P McGee

Steve Bodio said...

Savage: I am complimented. Let me know when you post?

Just Another Savage! said...

Just put it up.

Thanks again good stuff! I appreciate your voice in the matter. Hope I can help spread it around my Houndsmen/Terriermen friends.


Anonymous said...

@ Retriever Man - you are not the only person who has a gut reaction to Santorum, and not all who do are dog people ... he is so anti everything ... birth control, abortion, any kind of choice, pro school prayer, and bases his opposition to same sex marriage on the fact that marriage is a "Holy Sacrament" and we have to respect that ... hmmmm .... what about all of us who belong to faiths which do not consider that marriage a sacrament, let alone believe that the government has the right to dictatate our private, personal choices to us.