Florida Braces for MSN Battle

Cross post with permission

Florida Braces for Mandatory Spay/Neuter Battle


Take Action!
Write your State Representative today!


January 23, 2009


A Mandatory Spay/Neuter (MSN) bill has been introduced in the Florida Legislature. HB 451, sponsored by State Representative Scott Randolph, would require every dog and cat over 4 months of age to be sterilized, unless they meet highly restrictive criteria for exemption.


Mandatory spay/neuter has failed everywhere it has been tried. Even so, animal rights activists continue to propose it as a one-size-fits-all solution to pet population issues. NAIA staunchly opposes mandatory spay/neuter because it does not work, harms animals, harms pet owners, and harms the community.


Visit NAIA web site to read the full text of HB 451.


Better solutions exist for addressing excessive shelter populations: supporting responsible ownership, encouraging adoptions, and limiting pet imports. Each year hundreds of dogs and cats are imported by rescue groups specifically for adoption. This foreign influx poses a health concern for both humans and pets and competes with Florida shelter dogs and cats for new homes.


The time to mobilize is NOW. Experience in defeating similar bills in other areas shown that early and continuous opposition by the grassroots constituency and recognized authorities is the most effective way to defeat this bill. If you live in Florida, you can start by writing your State Representative outlining your concerns about this bill, using the talking points provided. Begin building a relationship with your State Representative. Encourage your friends, neighbors, and family members to do the same.


If you live in Florida, please TAKE ACTION now on behalf of pets and pet owners!


If you received this forwarded message from a friend, please sign up HERE for our Action Alerts to stay informed about HB 451 and other anti-pet legislation.

JOIN OUR 17 YEAR MOVEMENT!
DONATE TO NAIA TRUST NOW

A Boy And His Dog

Video footage will be all we have to remind us what an important role animals play in our lives if Animal Rights Organisations such as Animal Australia and PETA succeed in the hideous end goal of total animal liberation and admire from a distance.

If Rudolph Was a Pitt Bull

A Christmas Story

Twas the night before Christmas and all through the house,
Not a creature was stirring, not even a mouse
The stockings where hung by the chimney with care
In the hopes that St Nicholas soon would be there

But at the North Pole sudden changes arose
All down to Rudolph and his ruby red nose
Clipboard in hand, a breed expert arrived
He motioned to Santa saying," please step aside".

A smooth haired coat and a muscular build
A broad deep chest our Rudolph did yield
The breed expert's pen, created pages of ticks
Then he suddenly called out "good lord, we've been tricked!"

"This creatures no donkey and clearly no horse!
I know these things! I've attended the course!"
Look at my clipboard the boxes are full!
It's very obvious to me: Rudolph is a pit bull!

Out with the measuring sticks, he explained to Santa the law
And he measured poor Rudolph from shoulder to floor.
As the spectacle continued Santa said with a sigh
He's a reindeer you fool! Why must he die?

"The law is the law" the expert said standing tall,
Then picked up his mobile and made a quick call
The sound of sirens filled the peaceful night air
and Rudolph removed .to who knew where?

Days turned too weeks and confused and alone
Rudolph pined, for the place he called home
As the first snow started falling Rudolph gave up the fight
And he took his last breath on a cold winters night

You may think this is funny, if a little untrue.
But how would you like it, if it happened to you?
If your dog was taken because of its look?
Because it ticked enough boxes in some silly book?

Regardless of parentage it doesn't matter what breed
If it ticks enough boxes then it's a done deed
So humour me here and pretend this is true
Think how you would feel if it happened to you.

Cuddle your hounds while you have them close by
For some spend this Christmas, waiting to die.
Now back to the story, it doesn't end there
One more short verse I need to share

Santa fetched Rudolph's body and cried for his friend
And swore to himself, this would not be the end
And I heard him exclaim as he drove out of sight
"The law is wrong, please help us to fight!"

Copyright Alison Green

Urgent Help Needed In Texas

TX-RPOA E-News

From Responsible Pet Owners Alliance, the reasonable voice regarding animal issues in Texas. Responsible Pet Owners Alliance is an animal welfare organization, not "animal rights" and, yes, there is a difference.

Permission granted to crosspost.

August 17, 2007

Responsible Pet Owners Alliance has had many requests for a sample letter to send San Antonio city officials opposing the Chapter 5 Animal Ordinance Revisions, which include Mandatory Spay/Neuter of all outdoor cats and all dogs over 6 months or buy an Intact Dog Permit. However, better than a form letter is National Animal Interest Alliance's Cap Wiz which only takes a couple of minutes out of your busy day!

By going to the NAIA Trust URL below, you have a choice of sending an email or writing a letter (which can be printed out and faxed to all city officials) or do both! There are special instructions for out of state letters or emails.

http://capwiz.com/naiatrust/issues/alert/?alertid=10185286
OR TINY URL:
http://tinyurl.com/2a2bja

NAIA has covered all the major points and offers more effective alternatives. For a copy of the ordinance and other related information, visit our website and click on the Action Alert button on the home page:
http://www.responsiblepetowners.org

RPOA would appreciate copies of any local, state or national pet/breed club letters for our web site. The national "animal rights" legislative agenda for Mandatory Pet Spay/Neuter and Breeder Permits is being mentioned in Houston and for the third time in Austin. So all eyes are on San Antonio. What passes in San Antonio won't stay in San Antonio. Everyone did such a good job tabling AB 1634 in California and now Texas needs your help!

Responsible Pet Owners Alliance
900 NE Loop 410 #311-D
San Antonio, TX 78209
Phone: (210) 822-6763
Fax: (210) 822-9038
Website:
http://www. responsiblepetowners. org

Healthy Pets Act Won't Be Forgotten

Healthy Pets Act won't be forgotten
Tom Hennessy, Staff columnist
Article Launched: 07/14/2007 10:11:01 PM PDT

Ten weeks ago, life was a joy. Birds sang. Flowers bloomed. And except as a bit of blight on the legislative landscape, I had never heard of Lloyd Levine.

Then an e-mail arrived from a friend and former co-worker, John Zappe.

"I want to pitch you a column idea," he wrote.

The idea that weighed on John's mind and on the minds of thousands of other California pet owners like him was a piece of proposed legislation called AB1634; otherwise known as the Healthy Pets Act.

For the next two months, it virtually consumed that part of my life devoted to writing columns.

Sponsored by Levine, a Democrat from Van Nuys, and promoted by an acid-tongued activist named Judie Mancuso, AB1634 was a proposal, which, among other things, would have required every California dog and cat to be spayed or neutered by the age of four months.

After being passed by the Assembly, it was killed last week by a state Senate committee. As Bill Shakespeare would have said, "'twas a consummation devoutly to be wished."

Alas, the bill, or something vaguely like it, will probably be back early next year. Before that happens, however, I want to write about it one more time; mostly to coax those of you who supported it to see that the bill got as far as it did on lies, misinformation and raw emotion.

Harsh question

On May 10, I wrote my first column on the bill and on its provision to spay or neuter animals at age four months.

The column generated a lot of e-mail, but the most eye-popping was from Texas, where a similar bill had been introduced. The message was from a dog breeder named Pat King.

"Do the legislators and/or governor realize this is like giving a 2-year-old girl a hysterectomy or a boy a castration?" King asked.

Thanks to Al Gore's invention, the Internet, pet owners sent me other startling e-mails from throughout the United States. From them, I learned that shelter numbers are declining, not increasing, as Levine and others were saying.

I learned that dogs were being transferred from shelter to shelter in order to swell their input numbers. I learned that several breeds of dogs are endangered. I learned all that and more.

The pet lovers who wrote those letters, and poured their hearts into them, were terrified that this legislation might be enacted. They were also appalled that the issue, at the time, was not getting more coverage by the media. Eventually, it did.

But the publicity was not always what the pet lovers had hoped for. For example, the Press-Telegram's entry into the issue was an editorial supporting Levine's bill.

This was understandable, however. One problem with the new legislation is that it had been crafted by people who thought they understood the problem of pet overpopulation, but really do not, and by people using false figures to make their case.

Misnamed

The very name, the "Healthy Pets Act" - opponents called it the "Pets Extinction Act" - gave the legislation an aura of do-goodism. I found myself talking to many people who sincerely believed they were on the right side of this issue. And who clearly were not.

Thankfully, there were those who saw through the bill.

"This is simply a feel-better bill that, in the end, will have no effect whatsoever," an opponent of the bill wrote me in June.

In the end, opponents of the bill sent about 20,000 letters against it. AB1634 may well have been the most contentious piece of legislation this year.

By the time the debate died in the Senate, the bill personally cost me a couple of friendships within the animal rights community. I was as appalled with their stand as they were with mine.

The bill also cost me any remaining faith I had in the Legislature, especially when two local members of the Assembly told constituents they were opposing the bill, then voted for it - all in the same day.

The bill will return

There were other arguments against the bill:

It did nothing to deal with the problem of puppy mills, which are run in other states and which ship in sick and diseased animals to California pet stores.

While decrying pet overpopulation, backers of the legislation ignored the fact that 59 to 70 percent of the animals euthanized in state shelters are feral cats or kittens, wild animals living in colonies.

Much of the public supporting the bill was simply unaware of what it would do.

"Why are you against this bill?" one reader asked, and said flatly, "It will save animal lives."

In point of fact, it would not have done that.

Alas, the bill will return in some form or other after the first of the year. It will have to be fought all over again.

Through these contentious 10 weeks, one shining moment stands out. Supporters of the bill brought retired quiz show host ("The Price is Right") Bob Barker to Sacramento to drum up votes for the bill.

Opponents countered with Lassie (actually the ninth edition of the famous dog) and actor Jon Provost, who played his master, Timmy, on TV. In terms of popularity, Lassie and Timmy carried the day.

One last note. Perhaps feeling the effects of the outcome, Rep. Levine lamented that foes of the bill see him as "the devil incarnate."

Not in my case, Lloyd. I just see you as one more legislative hack.

Tom Hennessy's viewpoint appears Sunday, Tuesday, Thursday and

Friday. He can be reached at (562) 499-1270
or by e-mail at Scribe17@mac.com

AB1634

Californians watch this space . . . .

Defensive Breeding

Walt has been writing about the demise of the purebred dog world at the hands of its owe through lack of awareness by choice or by "head-in-the-sand" syndrome for some time, the whole while during this time the AR and AL vested interest organisations and groups have been influencing the American law makers very very successfully. I guess those of you who read by blog may be asking why I write about those things which are happening in America.

The answer is simple, it's happening here but perhaps not yet, YET being the operative word, quite as quickly as in America and in including these American events it is my hope the Australian purebred dog world will put the "blue ribbon" second to that of lobbying the Australian Governments both Local, State and Federal, to ensure the law makers DO NOT make decisions based on only what the AR and AL groups tell them.

Defensive Breeding by Walt Hutchens

What I meant by the term 'defensive breeding' was changing our programs so that the primary goal is assuring that our breeds will survive in a political and social climate that is increasingly hostile to breeding.

That means we need to think a lot more like folks who breed endangered species and a lot less like, well, 'dog breeders.'

Show dog breeders think of winning (mostly appearance and movement), they think of perfection for this litter, and they think of control -- nobody should be able to breed from an animal I bred unless I approve.

(I know that some show breeders consider other factors or may even put other things first. It is also true that things are someone different for breeders of hunting dogs, working dogs, and others. I am speaking in general.)

The defensive breeder would think of:

1. Genetic soundness: Because we can expect steadily smaller breedable populations our breedings will need to be planned with consideration of genetic diversity and minimizing the spread of inherited disease. We need to ditch the use of popular sires, stop breeding only to the dogs that win, mostly eliminate high inbreeding coefficient breedings. Every dog in every line ought to be a possible breeding candidate, considered on the sum of its merits. The most distantly related animals (often foreign or recently imported) need to get favorable consideration just because they're distant.
2. Geographic dispersion: Breedable animals should be spread as widely as possible. We need to ask ourselves "If I lost all my breedable animals tomorrow, would I be able to rebuild my line? Or would it be gone forever?"
   

(Suppose your kennel were burned with the loss of all? What if an ACO shows up with a truck and a cop with a warrant to seize them all? Ten years from now there'll be drugs to cause sterility: what if someone tosses drugged meat into your dog yard?)

Get rid of requirements for S/N of every pet. Explain the issues both ways, including the AR goal of eliminating breeding. Support any responsible owner decision. Encourage those owners who might want to participate in activities requiring an intact animal to do so; if someone might want to breed, try to steer her toward a quality dog and offer encouragement and support. Consider partnerships in which you exchange intact dogs with a breeder in another state (or even better, another country!), either with or without plans to breed.

(Yes, these changes might mean a few more unintended breedings. Is that really worse than the risk of losing our breeds over the next ten or twenty years?)

In general we need to raise our eyes above the horizon of the next litter and think how our line might continue ten or twenty years from now. We need to stop thinking just of winning and begin to view ourselves as stewards of our breed, responsible for its health into the distant future in an America with laws and a strong AR subculture that are likely to make continued breeding steadily harder.

That's what I was thinking about when I said 'defensive breeding.' It would help if the AKC could begin to say some of these things.

Walt Hutchens
Timbreblue Whippets

A Wakeup Call To AKC Delegates

A SAOVA message to sportsmen, pet owners and farmers concerned about protecting their traditions, avocations and livelihoods from anti-hunting, anti-breeding, animal guardianship advocates. Forwarding and cross posting, with attribution, encouraged.



Dear American Kennel Club Delegates,

Several months ago, when your board of directors proposed to enter into a contractual arrangement with Petland to register Petland puppies eligible for AKC registration, many of you objected. In fact, enough of you objected to what you considered an inappropriate business relationship for AKC that your board of directors finally dropped the plan.

It was a perfect example of good governance and fiduciary responsibility at work—delegates from the member clubs acting as they knew their club memberships wished.

More activism is needed. Dog fanciers and the AKC face grave challenges. In addition to the loss of registrations and the Club’s standing, a tide of legislation threatens "the sport of purebred dogs." Being the biggest, and the oldest, canine registry in the nation confers the opportunity and the responsibility for AKC to fight to protect the nation’s purebred dog owners, breeders, and competitors, and its own reputation. It is critical that AKC’s Board of Directors act wisely and effectively! Are they? It is the delegates who must ensure that they do.

Important as it is, it is often not enough to merely object to a board or management action or policy, but rather to be proactive in directing the board to take certain measures to correct a problem, and to ensure that the Board is and remains responsive to the delegates. Your board of directors represents you, but it is you, the delegates, who are responsible for protecting your dogs, the fancy’s studbooks, and the AKC’s long-held good reputation.

Specifically, what might current delegate priorities be? One would be to reverse the board’s decision to remove Cindy Cooke as a delegate from the Kalamazoo Kennel Club. Ms. Cooke has served the fancy long and well; her permanent absence would be a great loss to the delegate body and therefore AKC. Her outspoken opposition to AKC’s PAWS misadventure with the animal rightist Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) cost her dearly.

Another issue is Board turnover. Like most corporate boards, the AKC Board elections are structured to ensure smooth transition and institutional memory no matter how long individuals serve. However, every organization needs fresh input now and then, and the demanding issues of today urgently require a board that is accountable to the delegates. The delegates would do well to preserve the present two consecutive term limit on board service; in other words, no director may serve more than eight consecutive years. The majority of the current board will have served to twenty (20) years before being term limited.

Just as important, the delegates would do well to reject any by-law change that would permit board members whose clubs have replaced them to continue serving out their four-year terms in office, instead of until the next annual election. Whether board members or not, delegates represent their clubs, and their clubs are entitled to the last word on who should represent them to AKC. Recalled politicians don't continue to stay in office as everyone's and no one's representative. Efforts to change this longstanding precedent should be rejected.

Finally, in the vexing area of legislation, delegates need to demand greater accountability and cutting-edge understanding of the issues from the board, AKC top management, and AKC’s legislative department. AKC was initially very active in protesting California’s proposed statewide mandatory spay and castrate bill, until the bill’s sponsor agreed to eliminate the spay and castrate requirement for visiting dogs. As that meant owner accompanied dogs traveling to Long Beach, California for AKC’s joint major show with Eukanuba could come and go as intact dogs, assuring the survival of the show, it appeared as if AKC all but lost interest in protesting the bill, or terribly mismanaged its lobbying immediately before bill passage. Yet the survival of one dog show, however big and prestigious, is the least of what is wrong with any mandatory spay and castrate bill!!

What was needed in Sacramento at the pivotal Appropriations Committee hearing was the personal testimony of AKC’s top management, either Ron Menaker or Dennis Sprung. AB1634 ultimately passed by the minimum required 41 votes. During the ten hours that the bill’s floor vote was suspended and the issue hung in the balance, Mr. Menaker or Sprung should have personally contacted Long Beach’s two abstaining representatives and requested them to vote no. You use your high-profile, top people in such circumstances. This is lobbying 101. As it was, they both voted yes. Only one more nay vote would have permanently killed this monumentally dangerous bill.

AKC has steadily bled registrations for the past 15 years; at this point registrations are at a 40-year low. As delegates, you might want to think about why AKC is also bleeding its own more than century-long prestige and if you can improve your oversight of these flawed management decisions. How comfortable are you with the plan to create a registry political action committee (PAC) when current officers and board members contributed $29,000 to the reelection campaign of PAWS sponsor Senator Rick Santorum? Your clubs, and all of the owners of dogs club members have bred, are depending on you.

SAOVA wishes you a pleasant visit in Las Vegas and a productive meeting.

Bob Kane
Sportsmen's and Animal Owners' Voting Alliance - http://saova.org
Issue lobbying and working to identify and elect supportive legislators
For timely and accurate national animal rights information, join http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EachVoteCounts/ or see http://saova.org/alerts.html

Great Article by Dr Al Grossman

For the past five years, part of which I spent as an AKC Delegate, I have seen AKC inadvertently shoot itself in the proverbial foot. The PAWS legislation, which tore the fancy apart, and the "clandestine" approach to the agreement with the Petland Pet store chain come immediately to mind.

During this period PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) and the HSUS (Humane Society of the United States) turned themselves into a powerful legislative juggernaut backed by millions of dollars that were milked from a gullible public and have become a royal PITA (Pain in the Ass). AKC was slow to recognize their growing influence and has suffered the consequences.

Three major tsunamis occurred during this time to create a perfect storm for AKC and the world of purebred dogs. First was the expansion of leisure time and the phenomenal growth of the recreation industry. Many different opportunities arose for leisure time activities from Little League baseball to the explosion of the cruise industry. The cadres of die-hard fanciers stopped growing as the next generation found other pursuits more interesting and challenging. Breed and All Breed clubs began to wither and die on the vine as few new members were to be found.

A growing number of entrepreneurs saw an opportunity to make a fast buck from the growing pet dog population by starting "registration" bodies and issuing a piece of paper stating "Your dog is now registered with God All Mighty Kennel Club" - no need for a stud book, inspections, DNA testing or whatever. You now have a purebred dog registered on the cheap. With a PC and a printer you too can become a registration body. Just print the meaningless document and collect the dough.

At last count, AKC had 26 competitors in the registration business. For many years the only "real" competitor was the United Kennel Club. At least they maintained a stud book, published magazines, and held dog shows. Everyone could live with such legitimate competition.

Interestingly enough the number of homes with dogs as pets has increased as AKC registrations dropped. The registrations of AKC began a steady decline as people either were not convinced of the value of registering a dog with AKC or were deceived by effective advertising and promotion to register with other bodies. Of course, it did not help that many puppy mills, discouraged by AKC's growing number of stringent rules about inspections, frequent sires' DNA confirmation, and emphasis on health and good animal husbandry, turned away from the AKC bureaucracy and created their own registration bodies, which for them simplified their registrations and cost them less money. The new registration bodies were able to promote these "new" registration entities to the pet shops, which sold their products, by giving them kickbacks.

Some of these entrepreneurs also found another gold mine. They helped foster the breeding and promotion of so-called "designer dogs." CockaPoos, Labradoodles, Puggles and the like began to be the "in" thing for the unsophisticated public. Eureka, another vein to mine.

Now along came the most vicious threat to the sport of purebred dogs - the resurgence of the Animal Rights Movement. This is a movement so insidious that it grows likes a cancer. An unhealthy amalgamation of extreme environmentalists, Greens, Greenpeace, ALF, PETA, HSUS, etc., has learned to prey upon weakened institutions like a bunch of jackals. It appeals to the young and idealistic who are seeking a cause to give meaning to their lives. They practice all of the techniques of cults and give them a philosophy of veganism, environmentalism and radicalism. Upset the status quo, be in the forefront of a new movement, change the universe and you will be part of the new chosen ones, is their motto. This has high appeal to impressionable young people and is a message as old as time now supported by money, advertising and hucksterism.

These people have become dangerous. They have destroyed facilities using animals for research. They have killed and maimed animals in their quest for the new nirvana. They have harassed researchers and others involved in vital medical research. Lastly, and most telling, they have learned the art and skill of manipulating legislative bodies. With their huge cache of money, they have been able to mount punitive anti-dog legislation in city after city and state after state. The punitive, anti-dog legislation in Louisville, Kentucky shows that the inmates have taken over the asylum.

Many years ago, when I was the publisher of Doral Publishing, Patti and Rod Strand came to me about publishing a book exposing the takeover of the Animal Humane movement by groups of fanatics. We published it under the title THE HIJACKING OF THE HUMANE MOVEMENT. It was a great critical success. As a result of its publication, I received a number of death threats, but I also got to participate in the founding of NAIA (National Animal Interest Alliance) and served on its first Board of Directors.

As I became more and more concerned about this insidious cancer, I approached AKC to take some affirmative action against these fanatics. I got plaudits for my writings but the powers-that-be at AKC indicated that the situation wasn't too serious and that I was being an alarmist. So much for foresight.

As these events hovered in the background, they finally came together to form a perfect storm which hit AKC and the fancy with unprecedented violence. AKC and the fancy reacted with shock and dismay at our failure to anticipate the results of our inaction and the support of PAWS and Petland without consulting the delegate body and the fancy in advance. The realization of unintended consequences struck us like a thunderbolt. We have been scurrying around ever since trying to regroup and decide on a corrective course of action. As the famous Oliver Hardy of the Laurel and Hardy comedic team would say, "Well, here is another nice kettle of fish you've pickled me into".

Having painted this canvas full of gloom and doom, I would like to take this opportunity to change my pallet and paint another type of picture. Hopefully one that uses brighter colors and offers some clues to a better future.

First off, we need to recognize we are no longer in a growth industry. We need to re-identify what business we are in. Just like the Pennsylvania Railroad, who discovered they were not just in the railroad business but the transportation business, we are no longer just in the dog game. We are a part of the leisure and recreation industry and must begin to act accordingly. We must change our constitution and by-laws to accommodate this change.

• We need to recognize that the sports of Agility and Rally are the growth portion of our new industry, and begin to give them the recognition and representation they deserve.
• While the emphasis on the bottom line is important to our survival, we should not become overly dependent on the roller-coaster stock market for a major share of our income.
• We should initiate a study of the possibility of acquiring the UKC so there would be one strong body representing purebred dogs. Greater economies of scale would be possible with this concentration of resources.
• AKC should move out of New York, sublease the current facilities, and join with the Raleigh portion of the company. As our registration income shrinks, it is folly to stay in New York with its ultra-high costs. Admit the division was a mistake and now rectify it.
• Let's admit that the delegate body has become unwieldy as the number of clubs joining AKC increases. The new constitution and by- laws should address a new way of representation, making sure that it's duties and responsibilities are more clearly spelled out.
• The archaic notion that the Board of Directors of AKC must come from the delegate body has to be reviewed. We should have the opportunity to bring in expertise from other arenas to give us wise counsel as needed. We need to open our eyes to the realities of the 21st century. Our flexibility is being limited by our own "inbreeding". We need what we extol in our dogs - "hybrid vigor," which some good outcrosses can give us.
• The Board of Directors should cease micromanaging the organization and delegate more authority to the President and staff.
• The National Championship show should be permanently located in one city so it can grow its' identity. It needs to be placed in a location that can rival New York City as a destination city. Tampa and Long Beach do not meet those criteria - Las Vegas does. Good transportation, lots to do and see, and excellent facilities. It's a natural.
• We need to change the direction and philosophy of how to combat animal rights legislation. AKC should take a leaf from Union organizers and hire people to go to the hot spots, organize the campaign, help letter writers, and lobby the local/state legislators in place. They should spend at least a month on-site to do this.
• AKC should retain a PR firm whose sole job is to poke fun and ridicule at some of the preposterous things that animal rights groups do. They need to point out that these people don't realize the consequences of their own actions and spell out the unintended consequences. Humor can be very effective, especially biting humor.
  

I leave you with the following guideline. Tactics knows what to do when there is something to do; Strategy knows what to do when there is nothing to do.

Dr. Grossman, a long time judge of Sporting Dogs and publisher of Doral Publishing is now the President of Winning Solutions.info, a website devoted to developing the Professional Mentor concept via vital information for the beginning breeder/exhibitor at http://winningsolutions.info

http://www.caninechronicle.com/Features/Grossman_07/grossman_607.html

Watch Out For Governor Bill Richardson

All the good pet owners of America better watch out for Governor Bill Richardson.

Read what Ron has to say about him and take note.

This is a dangerous man to all pets and pet owners.

[quote]
Governor Bill Richardson is squarely in the Animal Rights camp. His "advisors" on animal issues come from New Mexico's largest Animal Rights organization APNM-APV (Animal Protection New Mexico - Animal Protection Voters). APV is the PAC of APNM. Look at the legislation the Governor endorses and who writes that legislation. The first version of the Animal Sheltering Services Act (2004) had provisions for mandatory statewide spay/neuter of ALL pet animals. The provision was hidden in the bill for animal shelters. Fortunately, in 2004 (the first year the legislation was introduced) I was able to work with a senator's staffer and have the mandatory spay/neuter language removed.

Also consider the background of the lady who was appointed by Governor Richardson to head writing the Animal Sheltering Services Act. As I recall, she was the "undercover" PETA member that misrepresented herself to get employment at Huntingdon Labs. At one time her diary was on the internet. She moved from New Jersey to New Mexico. In preparing the Animal Sheltering Services Act she worked with the New Mexico Regulation and Licensing Department (RLD).

The bill was reintroduced in 2005 and 2006. Now there will be another try in 2007. I'm concerned what language may be added to the bill for the upcoming legislative session. The session starts at noon January
16 and ends at noon on March 17.

Governor Richardson's press release is posturing him for the presidential race. Look at each of his 10 points. Without knowing who wrote it, wouldn't any of us suspect the 10 points were an HSUS initiative? Does anyone really believe the Governor came up with those points on his own?

Since the Governor will be a candidate for president, I suggest that his position is of concern to all of us.

Ron Gustafson
[/quote]

smile-wailful

FINAL PUSH - Lousiville VETO Ads

The pet owners of America and Louisville will not take it sitting down.

In the wee hours of Wednesday morning (0345) on the 20th day of December 2006 the Democrats pushed through an anti pet law that will shake the American pet community. Below is an email from Robin Harrison, one hell of a passionate animal lover and activist with a Mack Truck load of passion to achieve a positive result for the pet community not just in Louisville but the whole of America.


Hi folks!

Wow, whatta hot and heavy day! This is gonna be a wordy message. I've written it w/those who might want to forward in mind, so much longer than a typical status update. YES, please forward!

Now, grab a cup o' hot chocolate or a toddy and settle in for the story. I'm glugging down the last of the holiday egg nog in a Santa mug that hasn't been put away yet. :-P

There has been a change of venue. The short story is that the Louisville Courier-Journal was giving us grief about "legal department review" and not wanting to cut us a break on the ad cost. We didn't quite make it up to the 1,800.00 we needed for even a tiny print ad with them.

The GOOD NEWS is that we have a nice block of radio ads set to run on *8* Louisville Clear Channel radio stations over the course of Thursday! Barbara hammered out this deal for us literally in the final moment. The only time I had was to decide if this was an effective pursuit and send in the payment.

Total, there will be 40 (5 apiece on each of 8 stations) drive time billboard spots run for louisville-pets.com, as in "This traffic billboard is brought to you by www-dot-louisville-dash-pets-dot-com".

PLUS, 40 spots of 15 seconds apiece through the day on Thursday saying:

"PET LOVERS! LOUISVILLE'S NEW ANTI-PET LAW MUST BE VETOED TODAY. CALL 502-574-2003 AND TELL THE MAYOR TO VETO THE PET LAW! PLEASE HELP SAVE OUR PETS OR SAY GOODBYE!"

The wording has changed from the original "say goodbye to your pets along with your rights" because there was some concern from Clear Channel that this wording was too strong. They also fussed a little about partisan language and references to AC Director Meloche' immigrant status at louisville-pets.com . Barbara had a talk with the folks at louisville-pets.com and I think those things will be toned down some before the ads run.

Cost of the Clear Channel Ads - 1,600.00.

For another 110.00, we can have a total of 63 "billboard" and 63 of the 15 second spots. I haven't tallied what's new in the campaign fund yet, but I think we're real close if we're not already there. I tossed in an extra 200.00 above my pledge to get the space we got. I didn't have it to spend, but heck, to make a ground breaking stand for
persecuted animal owners happen? PRICELESS.

Barbara has also been in touch with Radio One of Louisville. They have 5 stations broadcasting to the Metro area and have offered us 15 weather sponsor slots (like the drive time sponsor spots above) and 15 of the 15 second spots encouraging citizens to call for veto. The cost is 500.00. For 1500.00, we can have a full package of 40/40 as we
have above with Clear Channel.

We're covering the gamut with Clear Channel - news, talk, adult contemporary, country, even hip hop. I feel that from a strategic viewpoint, we've done 1000% BETTER for the public visibility of this campaign by going with broadcast media over print media.

The campaign CONTINUES! We have through tomorrow to buy more radio ad blocks. The donation page will remain open, tho the references to a Courier-Journal ad are no longer current. I'll try to get in for an update before I crash tonight - http://www.ccdirtdawgs.com/vetofund.com

Hindsight is 20/20. If I ever did this again, I would start off with a MEDIA campaign instead of limiting to a single venue like a newspaper. Of course, now I know that thanks to Barbara Haywood of My Dog Votes http://www.mydogvotes.com. She's ACE for advertising! We were sent an angel in what could've easily turned into a darkest hour. THANKS Barbara!

A quick recap for those who are just learning of this campaign:

* This ad campaign is an INDEPENDENT one fueled and funded by concerned pet owners across the nation

* We are doing this because the good folks and pet owners in Louisville need and deserve GOOD animal law, or at least freedom from BAD law

* We believe that any victory for Louisville over BAD animal law will be a victory for ALL animal owners everywhere

Examples of the Louisville law and the full 90+ page mind-boggling text of it can be found at
http://www.louisville-pets.com .

The law was passed by Louisville Metro Council just before the holidays. Mayor Abramson has through Thursday (Jan 4th) to VETO. If he does not veto, the law goes into effect for the residents and pet owners of Louisville Metro.

Bless you all for helping me to chomp away at this elephant. We've gotten where we are since Friday on 10.00 here, 30.00 there, 50.00 from over yonder. Simply amazing. BRAVO!

G'night!

Robin Harrison
Clear Creek Dirt Dawgs
http://www.ccdirtdawgs.com/vetofund.html
smile-wailful

State of Urgency in USA

The state of dog ownership in USA continues to be under fire with Louisville, KY being the latest target . Please read carefully and let the gravity of what is happening in USA sink in because it is happening here in Australia and yet for some unexplained reason the purebred dog community seems to be sitting on its hands enjoying a tea party!

Wake up y'all in Australia!

Best in Show, that proverbial blue ribbon and becoming a judge will all become obsolete when you are not allowed to own a dog!

*******PLEASE FEEL FREE TO CROSS POST DOG-WORLD WIDE************

To all involved in the KY situation......... I apologize to everyone affected by this ordinance, I grieve for what the clubs are about to endure............ BUT, WE CANNOT ALLOW THIS!!!!!!

Louisville, KY was a chosen target, you are the beginning of a massacre of dogs worldwide. I am so sorry they picked your town to start in, I feel your pain for having to bear the grunt of what NEEDS to happen. If ALL dog owners do not stand up RIGHT NOW and say NO WAY!!, this will spread across the country. By the end of 2007, there will be very few hills you can hide your intact animals behind. If we do not stand up RIGHT NOW for our rights, we will lose them.

Our anger and rage is not at your clubs, it is at Louisville, KY so please understand this. Right now, we are asking these clubs to look past their personal gain and help us stand up to these criminals. This is no longer about your organization's finances, it's about our rights. Lawyers can only do so much, an absolute shun on a city will have much more of an affect.

Please understand this is bigger and better than laws passing in one town, you are nothing more than an area 51 to AR groups. They made YOU an example, take the hit and FIGHT IT!!! No one is going to allow your efforts to go unnoticed, you will not be left behind, but because they chose you, YOU are the front line. Lead these people to do what's right, stand up to these unconstitutional laws and say NO MA AM.

Yes, you will take a hit this time...... but think about the long run...... how many shows are in your clubs' future if MSN (mandatory spay/neuter) is able to use your community as an example of getting away with it? We cannot allow law makers to even think for a second that dog owners will tolerate this, and if dog owners support ANY Louisville, KY shows, then we might as well scream off our roof tops nothing more than, " Make your laws, we will leave those in THAT community behind, and continue until you outlaw us too."

They picked a war on your hometown, and you have everyone (from what I see on the boards, more backing in this then EVER) willing to support the fight, forget the green and think about your dogs. What is more important, your club making money in 3 months or your ability to show your dog in 6?

We are being tested right now, and if our leaders (our clubs) are more worried about attendance than ownership rights, well then we lose. We are all taking a hit, the clubs, the residents of that county, our dogs, and everyone else across the country biting their nails waiting for it to happen in their town.

If we do not stand up now, well then, why bother even trying to fight it the next time. This is a test, question is, can we, as responsible dog owners, stand up and pass it??

Andrea Press
CapeFear APBTClub
capefearapbtclub@earthlink.net
http://home.earthlink.net/~capefearapbtclub/
Eyetrap Kennels
http://www.eyetrapkennels.com
"What's On Your Yard?"


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------


If you don't come (and I understand the reasoning behind this), then PLEASE support our LKC Legislative Fund. You can go to http://www.louisville-pets.com within the next couple of days to donate via paypal, or you can send a check to LKC LEGISLATIVE FUND --------- and send it to:


Ellen Kapen
LKC Treasurer
8620 Old Bardstown Road
Louisville, KY 40291


Thanks,
Karen


Permission to Cross post granted
smile-wailful