German Shepherd dog

Blitzen:Here is a copy of an article written for my Malemute breed newsletter discussing what I see as the major threat to dogs and cats, planned programs to affect legislation at the local level. Permission to cross post, but please note submission to the Alaskan Malamute Club of America Newsletter.

A Thousand Snakes in the Grass by Margaret Anne Cleek

Part 1

"Better the dragon you see than a thousand snakes in the grass." This Chinese Proverb should be recognized and heeded by pet owners and fanciers.

Currently anyone who breeds animals is the target of animal rights activists who wish to abolish the purpose breeding of pets, and in some cases pet ownership in general. While we are made aware of federal and state legislation threatening our ownership of our animals, for example PAWs and the Animal Welfare Act at the federal level and CA's AB 1634, mandatory S/N bill, and broad-based opposition is launched, I believe that the greatest threat is from local legislation enacted as quietly as possible.

The threat is greatest at the local level because a small special-interest group of animal right activists is following a quiet plan to rob us of control over our pets and their reproductive capacity and enacting this plan community by community.

Programs on how to enact legislation have been developed by special interest animal rights organizations. Action steps are outlined on websites with literature, sample wording, canned letters, and a plan showing how to proceed. They are told not to reveal that a new ordinance is the objective, but rather to form a taskforce to address animal welfare or to decrease shelter euthanasia. Also the advice is given to remain informal as this keeps you from being subject to "sunshine laws" which may exist to assure open and public process and to lay the groundwork and assure support from staff before going public. Thus the public is not aware that behind closed doors special interest groups are drafting an ordinance to suit their agenda.

A group is formed and under the guise of being a coalition which includes all "stakeholders" participants further their plan. Some participants are well-meaning, some know precisely what the real agenda is. In any case, the MSN or 'pay or spay" ordinance is drafted with city or county staff co-opted as a

Part 3:

In fact, there has been a dramatic reduction in the number of pets euthanized. The most reliable data available indicates between 3 and 4 million animals were euthanized in shelters last year. This includes feral cats, ill and infirm animals, dangerous animals, and owner turn in for euthanasia. These numbers are a far cry from the 25 million estimated 30 years ago and these numbers have decreased in spite of an increase in t he number of total pets and a doubling of the expected lifespan of dogs in homes (mostly due to leash laws). It is estimated that voluntary S/N rates for cats are around 90% and 75% for dogs (numbers from HSUS, American Pet Products Manufacturer's Association and Animal People). Spay/neuter for pets is an easy sell and represents one of the most successful social change efforts of this generation.

Before dog and cat fanciers are aware that such legislation is even being considered, senior staff and legislators have been indoctrinated to believe that there is a crisis so great and so intractable that extreme coercive and punitive action must be taken, that breeders are the scum of the earth, that a single intact animal is a threat to the community and thus vets must report animals not neutered by 4 months to animal control, that the community supports this draconian legislation, and that it has been hugely successful every where enacted. Any evidence to the contrary is dismissed as false information from breeders who are trying to protect their "business". Anyone who opposes the ordinance is demeaned as a selfish and heartless "special interest" while the so-called coalition is presented as representing the interests of the larger community and the animals.

The legislation is then presented to the municipal legislative body by staff as the extensive work of a "taskforce", all "stakeholders" have been involved, and it is specially designed to meet the needs of the community. In fact, the legislation is the "canned" product of an animal rights group and these taskforces are rigged, and anyone who does not agree with the agenda is not invited to the private meetings, or if initially involved but not with the program, "chilled" out of the proceedings by the dominant group.

The real kicker in all of this is that the agenda and legislative lobby work of a special interest group (possibly with a 501c3 status which means they should not be political) is presented to the council members or supervisors as a recommendation of staff. This makes passing it a knee jerk as councils or boards rubber stamp just about anything staff recommends in virtually every community. In some cases a MSN ordinance is not even presented to the public and is attempted to be snuck through on a consent calendar (Sacramento City August 2007).

It is my belief that the greatest threat to the ownership of pets lies in the stealth enactment of these ordinances in our communities. And this is not just happening in California, the land of fruits and nuts. Hendersonville, NC, Palm Beach, FL, Little Rock, AR, San Antonio, TX, Albuquerque, NM are some of the communities considering or enacting extreme AC ordinances.

END OF ARTICLE

Mandatory spaying and neutering invades our rights as citizens just as much as this hypothetical scenario: mandatory sterilization of young, human children so that, upon sexual maturity, they will not not produce progeny that will be a burden to the taxpayer by crowding the damned welfare rolls, the public school system, the prisons--and, god forbid, will not become politicians (such as Levine) who feed at the "public trough"--thanks to the support and contributions from fanatics and extremists with their "hidden agendas".

"I am not a dictator. I have only simplified democracy."
-- Adolf Hitler, 1936

Well done, Louise. 

Beetree, you are living in a dream world if you think your rights as a dog owner are not being eroded by the AR extremist groups like PETA and their hired guns, the state legislators. 

You can all bite me in my dream world, then! LOL! Send your money to Hitler assholes! What jerks, Of course if that is what you want to do. Blow up Iraqi women with DOWNS SYNDROME while you are at it! HODIE does an honorable job, but she sucks with PEOPLE! 

Get it right, with the right person, PEOPLE.

It is a big world, and you folks, are just a splat. on the mat.

By the way, I am on your side, ugh.

Unlike you, oh charming one.

 Blitzen,

My official position with PETA, is: Extremists never accomplish what would actually be beneficial, even if their ideologies are right.

Does that answer your question?

Do you want to bite me harder?

~Deb

Mystere, you are so right. When all some can think of to say is "bite me" and "bite me harder" instead of intelligently discussing the dilema dog owners are facing in almost every state,  it feels almost like a hopeless cause. It also makes me think that this breed board, and probably many others, is being infiltrated by PETA  and other AR extremist moles. I have a hard time understanding how anyone with any knowledge of the current situation can minimize it and make it sound  as if we are over-reaction to a bad joke. Nero fiddled while Rome burned.

In another part of my state, effective July 2, 2009, animal enforcement is mandated to come into your home, remove your dog, and sterilize it if it is an and unlicensed, unaltered pet.

Scenario: your bitchy neigbor files a complaint with Animal Control about barking (which may not even be your dog) and you suddenly receive an unexpected telephone call or a visit from an officer. "Oh, BTW, is your dog licensed?" BINGO!!

If your intact dogs are already "in the system" due to past complaints (even if not sustained), they will make easy targets. Keep them locked indoors when you are away from home.

My advice: do not let an officer (from either A/C or the police) see any of your dogs or enter any part of your property (house, yard, garage, kennels). Answer no questions--do not identify the names or your dogs--do not attempt to argue--until you are represented by an attorney.

Like any citizen, your rights are protected by the Fourth and Fifth Amendments to the US Constitution. These officials do not have court-ordered search warrants. If they threaten you with "misdemeanor" charges, these must be sustained by a judge in a court of law.

Did you ever think legislatures have to much time on their hands.  Did you ever wonder if anyone has any common sense anymore?   Do you think anything will ever change?

I've been in a mood today, sorry.

SSDD

Thank you for presenting the article and your own eloquent entries.

And as you aptly recognized, Beetree is most likely an AR mole [actually more like a worm].  My guess is that he is from HSUS, which is more dangerous than PETA at this point in time.  Most people realize how radical and unlawful PETA is.  But an enormous amount of taxpayers and pet lovers think HSUS is what its name wrongly implies...that it is a "humane society" when it really is a sophisticated, powerful political action committee with a primary agenda to end ALL pet ownership one little piece at a time with data that has proved time and time again to have been  fabricated.  Unfortunately, until local politicians are made aware of this background and given the true facts, they fall hook, line and sinker for the HSUS propaganda.

I was pointed to this article by a post on one of the Corgi groups.  I'd really like to know the completion of the last paragraph of part one that ends:  the ordinance is drafted with city or county staff co-opted as a .................  Could you post that, Louise?

To Beetree, if you're still listening, the war has only just begun.  Truth and justice will prevail...even though it will take one heck of a lot of work.  But responsible pet owners/breeders have united and now have a collective voice through PetPac. 

Thank you again Louise,
I will not take the time to explain what color looks like to the blind.  They will not get it, I think it is in the genes.