My Views on the Animal Welfare Movement

Any of us who have had animals for decades remember our biggest concern used to be commercial breeders – the puppy millers.  Then the sporadic but sustained reports of brutal pit bull terrier attacks I believe have been a key variable in bringing animal management into the vernacular of legislative bodies.  The strident activities of PETA – many events probably more urban myths than real – have made most of us animal lovers very nervous.  As a result, the opportunists - operating much like a certain previous Administration who quickly learned the easiest way to gain compliance was to scare people -have made the serious fanciers of dogs and cats the pawns of animal welfare in an ever strengthening battlefield between themselves (who don’t want increased costs in their animal use businesses) and those whose primary concern is animal advocacy.  I think it’s a very sad dilemma that this conflict should even exist.

It has taken me awhile to begin to put the pieces of the puzzle together but I *think* I am constructing a picture which mirrors reality.  And so I begin with the AKC.  As some may remember, a few decades ago a disgruntled employee of the AKC went to the media – specifically 20/20 – and claimed there were “irregularities” with some AKC registered dogs.  This was of absolutely no surprise to any of us who have always known AKC registration was nothing more than filing of papers.  Up to this time we all considered the commercial breeders – puppy millers – an unwelcome part of the AKC story.  There was no law against puppy mills so the best that any of us could do was to put “Buy from a Breeder” stickers on our car bumpers, hoping to encourage the public not to buy from pet stores.  It seems to me even the AKC was behind this campaign.  That was years ago….  In the event, the AKC reacted violently to the registration criticism and invoked the DNA requirement for heavily used sires and dams.  This extra burden on commercial breeders resulted in their defection as they decided to set up their own registries.   I, personally, was glad to see them go.  Not so at the AKC who soon realized how much the puppy mills were subsidizing their operations.  In a striking about face, the AKC has exhibited a strong commitment to luring back the puppy millers.  That’s when I knew the AKC was an organization not of gentlemen and ladies, not of the animal lovers as we had all taken for granted, but of businessmen.  It has become an organization that justifies animal slavery as “OK” as long as it comes with funding.

This strikes me as one of the strangest situations that I have ever seen.  Just think about it, the American Kennel Club is comprised not of individual members but of dog clubs.  Please show me one single dog club who belongs to the AKC that permits its members to sell puppies commercially.  Many demand genetic testing.  Many demand bitches only be bred rarely and never more than twice in any 3 estrus cycles.  So here we have an organization which is made up of dog clubs with very strict membership requirements pandering to puppy millers who could never qualify for membership in any of its member clubs!  And by pandering, I do mean I have seen on the AKC website offers to commercial breeders to register their puppies at fees less than they charge the respectable dog breeders.  Am I the only person who finds this a bizarre and surrealistic truth? 

There is a very true statement that no one can serve two masters.  Currently, the AKC has two masters.  The first, its constituency of dedicated, non-profit dog fanciers, and the second, the cash cows, the puppy millers.  I have to admit to being rather surprised by the puppy millers who register with the AKC.  Who would want to do business with an organization that publicly despises what you do?  If your money was that important wouldn’t you also want to vote, wouldn’t you also want influence, and wouldn’t you also want respect?  Puppy millers now have the pleasing nom de plume, “high volume breeder.”   Does anyone believe that is where satisfying the puppy millers will end?   In fact, it does not….the AKC has become an industrious advocate for these puppy millers even trying to dupe us all into believing just about any proposed legislation to control these commercial breeders is really a threat to us all. 

Because a lot of people tend to dismiss it, I want to be very clear about the life of a dog in a puppy mill.  It will be raised with minimal care.  A profit oriented business is not going to waste its money paying people to spend extra time with its dogs.  Profit is revenue minus expense.  Kennel help is expense.  The USDA governs puppy mills and has bare minimum requirements for animal care.  Its requirements are geared to prevent the death of the animal, not to ensure it has a happy life.  These dogs are slaves.  They are raised for no other reason than to produce the product – puppies.  They are bred as often as possible.  And when they are five or six – when whelping becomes more difficult for the dam, when c-sections become more prevalent, when milk is not as plentiful and when litter size becomes reduced they are replaced.  Does anyone believe these completely unsocialized dogs are then rehabilitated and made available to hundreds of people just waiting for a 6 year old dog who has never been anywhere but a very small kennel?  They are killed.  The USDA even has specifications on how many dead dogs can be buried in trenches per acre.  If you’ve ever loved anyone other than yourself I cannot understand how anyone could think this is “OK.”  No one who has a single shred of my respect would – to me this has the same moral footing as forced prostitution.  It debases life and commercializes living beings.

And now we come to the “welfare” side of the fence.  Let’s first analyze an organization that has had enormous influence on the dog fancy, not coincidentally founded by a long standing AKC Board member.  The National Animal Interest Alliance, known as the NAIA, styles itself as a reasonable, balanced, middle of the road “animal welfare” organization.   It reports faithfully how it fights the “animal rights” folks who are hoodwinking legislators into developing legislation that is damning to the serious animal fanciers.  All well and good it seems.  But its net is quite wide.  That’s because the NAIA has a constituency of people who use animals in circuses and rodeos, who hunt, who raise livestock and puppy millers.  I began looking around the seams of this organization and it seems to be less an animal welfare organization than an organization devoted to supporting the interests of its human constituency of animal users.  One of its flagship “programs” is collecting data on shelters.  “That sounds rather unhelpful,” I thought.  It doesn’t seem very logical until you do a little Google research and realize the NAIA is proposing a theory that we really don’t have an animal welfare issue in this country and, in fact, these shelters are actually buying dogs because there is such a shortage!  Mr. Bush couldn’t have done a better job at reconstructing this reality himself!  So it makes me wonder if maybe the “shelter” project is more about proving their theory (or allowing them to concoct the data they want).  And why would the NAIA want to do this?  Because, as an “animal welfare” organization, they want to insist that legislative animal control is totally unnecessary.  That helps their animal user constituency including their puppy millers.  And if someone could help me understand how going to Africa and lobbying for the continued killing of endangered African Elephants fits into “animal welfare” I’d love to have you try.  With friends like the NAIA, animals certainly don’t need enemies.

And then we have the Humane Society of the United States.  Probably like all you real animal lovers, I’ve been much bothered by the much broadcasted perspective that the HSUS is no better than PETA.  But I can tell you all this confusing input wasn’t really adding up to me.  Why, for instance, is the anti-HSUS contingent mad about Breed Specific Legislation (basically outlawing “pit bulls”) and yet none of them are talking about the real root cause which is dog fighting?  As a bull terrier breeder, I know true fighting dogs are bred for a rare ability to continue fighting even when they are in pain and endangered.  That’s a rare gene just like a bloodhound can follow a trail that is 2 years old.  So I know that many true fighting dogs can be dangerous and when their offspring find their ways into homes disaster can occur.  So it is the root cause of breeding fighting dogs which has to be aggressively addressed.  Make no mistake, I feel BSL is ignorant and shameful as there is no greater heart or superb being than a bull-and-terrier breed.  Today, dog fighting is very popular amongst inner city gangs.  And I know you can spot a fighting dog breeder from a helicopter because their dogs are raised on chains and not in dog runs.  So where, I asked myself, are all these HSUS critics in working to resolve the root cause?   If the HSUS has it all so wrong and if the HSUS is truly just an animal rights organization and wants the demise of all domestic animals then where are these critics when there are very real issues to be dealt with in animal welfare?  I have learned they aren’t there because animal welfare isn’t really their goal.  I am pained by bull fighting and cock fighting and clubbing baby seals and oil spills and how slaughterhouses are run and by the treatment of veal calves and caged chickens.  Of all the “animal advocates” who present themselves to us, I have only found one, the HSUS, who addresses these issues.    For these critics of the HSUS, animal welfare isn’t truly what they care about.  Neutralizing an organization that threatens their ability to commercialize on animals is what they care about – and that’s why they are anti-HSUS.

Certainly, the biggest critic of the HSUS – the one who brainwashed us with their version of the truth – has come from a very active group called Humanewatch.org.  “Yay,” I thought, “a group who can unravel all this confusion and can help me understand the good guys from the bad guys.  Someone who will do all my thinking for me so I don’t have to be even slightly bothered to find out the facts for myself.”  Not so much….Humanewatch. Org is actually run by a group called Center for Consumer Freedom (CCF) which is administered by a fella by the name of Rick Berman.  Rick has gotten a little bit of publicity recently because allegedly 92% of the donations to his organization goes into his own pocket.   Rick Berman represents animal commercializers, not animal lovers and he’s paid to discredit the HSUS.  

If you are like me and tired of being lied to, misled and manipulated then please do me the favor of researching the NAIA, please do me the favor of researching Humanewatch, please do me the favor of researching the HSUS.   Knowledge is power.  And through this power I believe the serious animal fancier will survive.  I am not a religious person because I’ve learned religious people are often the worst hypocrites.  But I am a spiritual person and I feel every day the life force and spiritual energy of animals and I know we share this physical planetary experience so that we may learn from them; they are not here to be mistreated because we have the capacity to do so. 

I have attached a letter from the HSUS as someplace to begin.  Healthy skepticism is a key element of the critical thinker but remember, cynicism is not skepticism. 

Dear Jon,

I could not agree with you more about reputable dog breeders sharing our values and goals related to humane care of animals. We absolutely believe that compassionate, reputable dog breeders play a vital role in the effort to help make puppy mills history.  For too long, there has been a perceived rift between the reputable dog breeding community and the animal welfare community. This rift has been exploited by puppy mills and all those who profit from the commercial dog breeding industry.

For years we have been extending ourselves to breeders, very eager to come together to work on this issue. There is a small group of breeders that we converse with on a regular basis, and the sad truth is that they are nervous to let that be known because of the disapproval they fear they would receive in their breeder communities. Recently, the Pet Connection blog posted an interview with me on this subject.  I was thrilled, hoping that finally some good breeders would be brave enough to speak out.  Sadly, I did not receive one email from a good breeder wanting to learn more about how we can work together.

(Here is a link to that blog: http://www.petconnection.com/blog/stephanie-shain-of-hsus/)

http://www.humanesociety.org/assets/pdfs/pets/puppy_mills/how_find_good_dog_breeder.pdf

www.humanesociety.org/breeder

http://www.zazzle.com/good_breeders_dont_sell_to_shops_bumper_sticker-128043214862481450

http://www.zazzle.com/good_breeders_oppose_puppy_mills_bumper_sticker-128796404142685095

With regard to Wayne’s blog about the genetic problems of certain breeds and the Pedigree Dogs Exposed documentary, I appreciate your feedback. While we have not done a lot of outreach on this, we do feel it is an important issue of which the public should be aware. As an organization that receives hundreds of complaints from puppy-purchasing consumers, we note the large number of complaints related to genetic disorders, and for this reason we feel obligated to speak out on the issue.

Stephanie

Stephanie Shain
Senior Director, Puppy Mills Campaign
sshain@humanesociety.org
t 301.258.3121 f 301.721.6414

The Humane Society of the United States
2100 L Street NW Washington, DC 20037
humanesociety.org

Join Our Email List Facebook Twitter