NEW LAWSUIT FILED TO FIGHT CRUEL PUPPY MILLS (Let's hear it for Doris Day and her Staff at the Doris Day Animal League!!!)
The Doris Day Animal League once again filed suit against the United Stated Dept. of Agriculture (USDA) for its abysmal record on puppy mills. The suite charges the USDA with failing to halt cruel and inhumane practices in “puppy mills” throughout the United States. DDAL describes in its suit the USDA’s illegal actions in exempting non-retail store pet dealers from compliance with the humane treatment standards mandated under the Animal Welfare Act (“Act”). It also details how the agency’s violations of the Act have lead to injury, illness, and untold death of thousands of puppies and other pets.
Each year, American consumers purchase thousands of puppies through non-retail store pet dealers. Over 25 years ago, Congress passed the Act, in part, to ensure that dog breeders provide humane treatment to animals in their care. Requirements include: adequate housing, ample food and water, reasonable handling, basic disease preventions, decent sanitation, and sufficient ventilation. Despite these statutory requirements, the USDA has consistently violated the Act by exempting all non-retail store pet dealers from compliance with these basic requirements, including dealers of hunting, breeding, and security dogs.
The Plaintiff’s lawsuit includes animal protection organizations, and concerned citizens who have observed conditions in puppy mills and have cared for animals rescued from puppy mills. For information on this and other DDAL activities, please visit: www.ddal.org
PUPPY MILL FACTS
HSUS research shows that approximately 4,000 puppy mills currently operate in the U.S., many of them despite repeated violations of the federal Animal Welfare Act (AWA) and other United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) regulations. In 1997, the agency used a force of approximately 70 inspectors to enforce its code -- an average of 57 facilities per agent, per year that need inspection. Although all 50 states have anti-cruelty laws that should prevent neglect and mistreatment of dogs in puppy mills, such laws are seldom enforced in rural areas where most puppy mills are located.
The Pet Store Link
The HSUS strongly opposes the sale, through pet shops and similar outlets, of puppies and dogs from mass-breeding establishments. Puppy-mill dogs are the "inventory" of these retail operations. Statistics from the Pet Industry Joint Advisory Council (PIJAC) suggest that approximately 3,500 to 3,700 of the 11,500 to 12,000 U.S. pet stores sell cats and dogs. PIJAC also estimates that pet stores sell 300,000 to 400,000 puppies every year. HSUS estimates the number to be 500,000.
The HSUS's Role
The HSUS has been fighting a relentless battle against puppy mills since the early 1980s, including monitoring the USDA's poor performance in this area and pushing for better AWA enforcement. Despite pledges to improve its inspection process, the USDA has failed to live up to its promises. In 1990, frustrated by the apathy of federal and state officials, The HSUS led a nationwide boycott of puppies from the seven worst puppy mill states: Arkansas, Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska, Oklahoma, and Pennsylvania. The boycott captured a great deal of national media attention, including numerous newspaper articles and television news reports on shows such as "20/20," "Good Morning, America," and "The Today Show." Raids on puppy mills subsequently took place in Kansas, where the state legislature, attempting to protect recalcitrant puppy mill operators by hampering investigators, enacted a law making it a felony to photograph a puppy mill facility.
Lemon Laws
As the horror of puppy mills gains attention, states are responding with "lemon laws" that protect consumers who buy puppies. Thirteen states now have laws or regulations that allow consumers to receive refunds or the reimbursement of veterinary bills when a sick puppy is purchased. While these laws place a limited onus on pet stores and puppy mills to sell healthy puppies, and theoretically improve conditions for their breeding facilities, The HSUS feels that they do not adequately protect the animals who suffer in these establishments.
For more information on the HSUS's role against Puppy Mills, please visit: www.hsus.org
FORGOTTEN VICTIMS OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE (By Vicki Stevens – Doris Day Animal League) (WARNING: This article is not suitable for young readers!!!)
Every 15 seconds, a woman living in the United States is beaten by her partner. Each day, at least four of these woman die from their injuries. People who have never been involved in such abusive relationships sometimes wonder why women who are don’t simply leave. The reason is because, in many cases, battered women lack the emotional support and financial resources necessary to make leaving their batterers a realistic choice. Furthermore, any attempt by a woman to flee her batterer is fraught with danger, especially without a carefully considered plan and a safe, secret place to go. Even if the woman is successful in escaping the home, she has not necessarily escaped her abuser. Anecdotes from social workers suggest that a battered woman is most at risk of being stalked and killed by her partner just after she leaves him. Unfortunately, leaving a violent partner is far from simple.
Of all the complex factors involved in how a woman copes with a domestic violence situation, perhaps the most understandable to outsiders is the fear that her abuser may vent his anger on other family members. Recent studies have shown that a batterer’s expressions of violence will almost always grow to include all family members – from a partner to a child to an animal companion.
Like child abusers, men who batter women may threaten to harm or actually kill a beloved animal in order to intimidate their human victims into obedience and silence. An abuser may even give an animal to his partner as a “gift,” with the specific intention of later using that animal as a tool to manipulate and control her. Batterers will often harm or kill animals in front of their partners to demonstrate the punishment they are prepared to inflict for their “disobedience.” Perhaps most disturbing, batterers may even force their partners to participate in the sexual molestation of an animal companion. Finally, if a woman does manage to flee, her batterer may threaten to harm or kill her animal if she doesn’t return.
The importance of an animal companions’ well being to the battered guardian and her children has only recently been recognized. For a woman whose batterer has isolated her from family members and friends, or for an abused child who has been frightened into silence, an animal companion may be the sole source of friendship and comfort. Yet, for a variety of reasons, including health code restrictions, lack of space and resources, concern that traumatized animals may injure clients, and concern that traumatized children may injure animals, most domestic violence shelters can not or will not accept animals. Furthermore, many domestic violence workers do not know how to assist women who wish to find shelter for their animals. As a result, it is estimated that up to forty percent of women delay leaving their batterer due to concern for the safety of their animal companions. Obviously, this can have fatal consequences for the women, their children, and their pets.
One of the first groups to address this problem was Feminist for Animal Rights (FAR). In 1993, FAR launched their Companion Rescue Effort (CARE) network, described on their web site www.enviroweb.org/far/care
as a “foster care program for the companion animals of women who are victims of domestic violence.” During the four years this program operated in North Carolina, FAR members convinced local domestic violence case workers to include questions about companion animals on their client intake forms to notify FAR when abused animals were in need of shelter. All aspects of the CARE program were administered by FAR volunteers. Their duties included developing and maintaining a list of qualified foster homes, transporting animals, and soliciting veterinarians for free or low cost medical care. While this type of program provides an invaluable service, well-intentioned volunteers may not always realize the high level of commitment it requires. Volunteers must be on call 24-hurs a day, and foster families must be prepared to deal with abused animals who may have behavioral problems.
In the years since FAR initiated its CARE network, other organizations have developed similar projects. One outstanding example is the Humane Society of Southern Arizona’s “Safehaven” program, founded by manager of operations Pat Hubbard. Battered women who wish to have their animals sheltered by Safehaven must sign a contract relinquishing ownership of their animals to the Humane Society for a period of thirty (30) days. The contract stipulates that all Safehaven animals will be vaccinated and spayed or neutered. Rather than taking up limited shelter space, Safehaven animals are boarded in private kennels, the locations of which are kept secret for the animals’ safety. Shelter staff involvement is limited to transporting the animals; the kennel operators provide all other care. This arrangement ensures that shelter staff remain available to animals being left for adoption. Hubbard is rightfully proud of her organization’s “progressive community outreach program,” describing Safehaven as “a very positive thing to do, helping both women and animals.” Proving widely popular, Safehaven has won grant funding and increased donor base for the Humane Society.
For further information, please contact www.enviroweb.org/far/care
Other Educational Links:
Other Links
