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

News Briefs and Updates June 20, 2015

SAOVA Friends,
 Decades have gone by without evidence that mandatory spay and neuter (MSN) laws have had any success.  Sometimes that is still not enough to deter officials from proposing these failed ordinances.  Should MSN be proposed in your area, we have compiled two handouts for your use. “Mandatory Spay Neuter – A Failure Everywhere” along with a collection of national organizations position statements opposing MSN, can be downloaded from our website  http://saova.org/download.html  

Thank you for reading. Cross Posting is encouraged.

Susan Wolf
Sportsmen's and Animal Owners' Voting Alliance
Working to identify and elect supportive legislators
saova@earthlink.net 
http://saova.org    

US FISH AND WILDLIFE FINALIZES CHIMP RULE

June 2015. US Fish and Wildlife (FWS) in response to a 2010 petition by HSUS and Jane Goodall announced a final rule to classify all chimpanzees, both wild and captive, as endangered under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). The final rule will go into effect on September 14, 2015. Under the new designation anyone working with captive chimps in the US must apply for a permit from FWS. Organizations that want to continue working with chimpanzees will have to document that the work enhances the survival of the species and benefits chimps in the wild. That could include research that boosts habitat restoration or contributes to improved management. If anyone is actively engaged in chimpanzee research, they must apply for a permit. According to FWS Director Dan Ashe, some biomedical research with chimps may be allowed to continue if it is critical for understanding human disease. 
 

In a press release The National Association for Biomedical Research stated, "The full impact the new FWS ruling will have on biomedical research is unclear. However, it would be unfortunate, even grave, should an infectious disease outbreak occur where human lives are at stake and a chimpanzee model could expedite development of life-saving medicines."  Read the full press release at NABR: http://tinyurl.com/phe9zya 
 

ALDF LOSES COURT BATTLE AGAINST SEAQUARIUM

The Orca Network, Animal Legal Defense Fund and others failed in their challenge against the Miami Seaquarium 's federal license renewal for the orca known as Lolita. "Only Congress, not this court, possesses the power to limit the agency's discretion and demand annual, substantive compliance with animal welfare standards," Judge Susan Black wrote for a three-judge panel for the 11th Circuit Court. 

Every year, Seaquarium must renew its Animal Welfare Act (AWA) license with the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). Before the expiration of its license in 2012, the ALDF sent a letter to the USDA asserting that Lolita's living conditions are inhumane, and Seaquarium's license should not be renewed. The USDA responded that it found Seaquarium in "compliance with the regulations and standards," and renewed the facility's license to keep and exhibit Lolita. It did not conduct an inspection of Lolita's living conditions based on the allegations in ALDF's letter. The ALDF sued in Miami, seeking a court order to set aside the USDA's renewal of Seaquarium's license, based on the theory that AWA animal welfare inspection laws should apply both to new licensees and license renewals.

In granting USDA summary judgment, the lower court found that the USDA complied with its license-renewal process, which requires just a certification of compliance, payment of an annual fee, and submission of an annual report detailing the number of animals exhibited in the prior year.   Full story at Courthouse News Service: http://tinyurl.com/ppaqjj2 
 

ALDF SUIT AGAINST PA DEPT OF AG MOVES FORWARD

The Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania allowed a lawsuit filed last summer by ALDF to move forward against the Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture.  According to their press release, ALDF sued the Department for passing watered down regulations that gutted Pennsylvania’s historic Dog Law. ALDF and Petitioners asserted that the Department was not authorized to exempt nursing mothers from the statutory ban on metal strand flooring and from the statutory requirement of unfettered access to exercise areas. Petitioners requested that the court enjoin the Department from enforcing above regulations currently in 7 Pa.Code 28a.8 and 28b.1, declaring these sections to be in conflict with the Dog Law and therefore unlawful, and order the Department to revise the regulations in a manner consistent with the Dog Law.  


Petitioners stated that the Dog Law prohibits Class C license holders (Commercial Kennels) from using metal strand wiring in the primary enclosure of adult dogs and requires unfettered access to an exercise area.  Department regulations provide for compliance if only 50% of primary enclosure flooring meets that regulation, and allow a commercial kennel owner to be in compliance if a nursing mother is provided with daily access to an exercise area.

Judge Bonnie Brigance Leadbetter overruled the Department’s preliminary objection to Petitioners’ standing. In her opinion Judge Leadbetter noted that before filing the suit Petitioners requested both the Department and the Independent Regulatory Review Commission (IRRC) review the regulations. Both the Department and the IRRC declined.  Judge Leadbetter wrote, “These allegations, if proven, strongly suggest that redress through other channels is futile and thus that judicial scrutiny is required to insure that the regulations adopted by the Department conform to the law under which they were promulgated.”   Opinion by Judge Leadbetter http://tinyurl.com/phxndwg 
 

PALM BEACH COUNTY CALLS FOR END TO IMPORTING DOGS, CATS

Palm Beach County's unwanted dogs and cats are more likely to die if rescue groups keep importing animals from other counties and states, local officials warned. The county's animal shelter near West Palm Beach takes in 15,000 dogs and cats a year that are at risk of being euthanized if they aren't adopted. Finding homes for local shelter animals is made harder by well-meaning rescue groups continuing to have unwanted dogs and cats trucked and flown into Palm Beach County for adoption events, according to county officials. Some imported dogs and cats are coming from as close as Broward and Miami-Dade counties while others come from Alabama, Tennessee and even farther.

Because many rescue groups have ignored the county's request that they stop bringing in outside dogs and cats for adoption, County Mayor Shelley Vana went public with a plea to focus on helping local animals. The press conference was prompted by another local rescue group bringing in 60 dogs from outside the county for an adoption event. 

 "How does flying or busing in puppies from other regions help the dogs in this community?" Vana asked at a press conference from the county shelter. Vana continued, “What message is being sent to would-be adopters? What happens to those at-risk at animal care and control when those animals are flown in? The truth is often uncomfortable. Importing puppies and dogs into Palm Beach County while dogs in our own shelter die, means that some groups are simply stocking their shelves with dogs that are highly adoptable at a high fee.”

The county wants rescue groups to at least temporarily stop bringing in outside animals until the county shelter reaches a 90 percent “save rate”. So far this year, the county has an 80 percent "save rate" for dogs, while that drops to just a 39 percent for cats. Source: Sun-Sentinel

The message above was posted to Oregon, Washington, California, Alaska and Hawaii residents by the Sportsmen's and Animal Owners' Voting Alliance (SAOVA) on one of six regional read only elists.

SAOVA is a nonpartisan volunteer group working to protect Americans from the legislative and political threats of radical animal rightists. Visit our website at http://saova.org for this program's goals, methodology and list signup details.

To unsubscribe from this list, exercise that option at http://mailman.montana.com/mailman/listinfo/saova_west

SAOVA
PO Box 612, Spencer NC 28159

SAOVA_West mailing list
SAOVA_West@mailman.montana.com
http://mailman.montana.com/mailman/listinfo/saova_west

SPECIAL REPORT-HSUS TAKING ACTION FOR ANIMALS 2014

SAOVA Friends,

The HSUS annual conference Taking Action for Animals (TAFA) was held June 27-30, 2014 in Washington DC.  HSUS describes the conference as one that promotes “mainstream solutions” and provides attendees education to become a better advocate for animals.   In other words, TAFA serves as a huge pep rally for animal rightists to connect, bolster their morale, and in the words of HSUS: “recharge their batteries.”  In his conference speech Wayne Pacelle told the audience, “TAFA is an attempt to attract the elite in the animal protection movement to help train you and educate you so then you can fan out all over the country and spread these messages and heighten your own level of effectiveness as an advocate.”

The various conference speakers included many of the old guard from the animal rights industry:  Gene Bauer and Bruce Friedrich (Farm Sanctuary); Carole Baskin (Big Cat Rescue); Sara Amundson (Humane Society Legislative Fund); Keith Dane (HSUS Equine Protection); Jonathan Lovvorn (HSUS VP Animal Protection and Litigation); Nancy Perry (Sr. VP Government Relations, ASPCA).

Nick Cooney and Nathan Runkle from Mercy for Animals (MFA) were also among the speakers.  MFA is probably best known for their undercover videos of animal agriculture which Runkle calls the “lifeblood” of the organization. MFA considers itself part of a “social justice” movement where portraying production agriculture as harsh and cruel will move people toward a vegan diet. 

Although not her first appearance, a newer face at TAFA was Lisa Fletcher, host of “The Stream” on Al Jazeera America and wife of Wayne Pacelle, who describes herself as a friend to all animals and vegan food maniac.  You may remember reading recently that Fletcher provided a platform for longtime radical activist Paul Shapiro, HSUS VP on Farm Animal Protection, on a segment of her show covering new USDA regulations.

Other TAFA scheduled speakers included, State Rep. Eddie Lucio III (TX); Jill Kline (Education and Advocacy Manager, Wisconsin Humane Society); Christine Coughlin (Pres. Minnesota Voters for Animal Protection); and Nicole Paquette (VP, HSUS Wildlife Protection/former Texas State Director).

TAFA also offered a series of workshops for the attendees.

“Becoming a Political Animal” workshop was moderated by HSUS director and former member of Animal Liberation Front, John Goodwin. Presenters included former state senator Roy Afflerbach (PA); Matt Dominguez, HSUS Public Policy Manager Farm Animal Protection; and Wayne Pacelle. Workshop attendees were instructed on effective lobbying at all levels of government from city council to Congress.

“Giving Farm Animals a Voice” workshop presenters included Erica Meier, Executive Director, Compassion Over Killing, and Kristie Middleton, Corporate Outreach Manager, HSUS Farm Animal Protection who shared strategies for effectively waging initiatives against farm animal cruelty.

Kelly Peterson, HSUS Senior Vice President for State Affairs moderated a workshop with former and current legislators to teach activists what “humane legislators” need to hear in order to pass animal protection laws.  The discussion panel included Delegate Eric Luedtke (MD); Representative Diana Urban (CT); and former Tennessee state Representative Eric Swafford, now HSUS Director for Rural Outreach and Development. We will cover this portion of the conference in more detail in a later article.

THE HSUS PLAN AND PROGRAMS

When Pacelle addressed the audience his speech centered on the four policy sections that HSUS uses to break down the animal protection movement. They are: Public Education and Awareness; Hands on Caring; Corporate Reform and Corporate Policy; and Public Policy and Enforcement.

Pacelle noted it is now a universal value in our society to oppose cruelty to animals.  With anti-cruelty statutes in every state carrying felony penalties it reinforces the fact that people who are cruel to animals are going to pay a price to society, either with incarceration or fines.  Pacelle continued, “That is the meaningful sort of legal framework for us to build upon.” 

As part of the HSUS “hands-on” programs, teams of staff and volunteers are assembled for disaster response, animal rescue, and for animal fighting and puppy mill cases.  According to Pacelle, HSUS can leverage images from these programs to raise public awareness that animals are in crisis situations every day across the country.

Pacelle then covered the third portion which is Corporate Reform.  Pacelle stated, “We live in a capitalist society where corporations produce the products that so many of us consume. They employ millions and millions of people. We want them as part of their broader mission of social responsibility to include animal welfare. We ask them to try to reach a higher standard. So this is where the anti-animal testing policies come in and the no gestation crate policies. This is vital work for us and we in HSUS spend a tremendous amount of time on it.”’

The final segment of Pacelle’s speech, which focused on Public Policy and Enforcement, should be a major wakeup call for everyone on how far the HSUS tentacles continue to invade our communities pretending to dispense mainstream values.

Pacelle introduced this segment saying that laws in a civil society are not only designed to keep order but to reflect the values which are basic to society.  The laws are not designed to change everybody; they are designed to deal with those who are increasingly viewed as (moral) outliers in society. The law addresses these outlier cases of people who are engaging in conduct that is no longer acceptable. The conduct may have been acceptable at one point, but it is no longer acceptable today.  Pacelle reminded listeners that it is up to them to advance social progress for animals just like the other great causes of civil rights, anti-slavery, and women's rights.

He then announced that HSUS now had State Councils in place in half the states in order to expand the HSUS reach and support HSUS state directors.  The councils cover equine and farm animal protection, law enforcement, faith, and park animal protection and HSUS plans to have these councils in all 50 states.  Pacelle informed the audience that these structures were being created to empower those committed to the animal rights industry and to advance the ideals of social reform.  He reminded listeners that social reform is not perfectly linear with consistent forward progress.  Felony and increased animal cruelty penalties, ending use of gestation crates, corporations enacting animal welfare policies sometimes move a step or two forward toward progress and then a step back.  To quote Pacelle, “That's the nature of a social movement -- especially when you've got big adversaries.”

We may be used to the animal rights rhetoric and vegan agenda; however the really disturbing part of this new “structure” plan is the HSUS District Leader Program now in place.  This program is designed to engage people in all 435 Congressional Districts and have those District Leaders lead political efforts to advance federal legislation by concentrating on influencing members of Congress.

Below is the ambitious position description for a District Leader as posted on the HSUS website.

The purpose is to help HSUS advance and accelerate animal protection priorities for companion animals, farm animals, and wildlife with legislation at the local, state, and federal levels.  Under the guidance of HSUS staff, the Leader is to develop an action plan for successful completion of one goal related to Legislative Advocacy; one goal for protection of Companion Animals, Eating with a Conscience, or Wildlife Protection; and one goal related to growing the “movement.”  The Leader is also expected to participate in the state Humane Lobby Day.  The Leaders are expected to organize grassroots activities, attend community events and meetings, and will be given a 'Toolkit' with program ideas.

Qualifications for District Leader positions include a commitment to the mission of HSUS; willingness to cultivate strong relationships with elected officials and lawmakers; and willingness to recruit new members, among other requirements and abilities.  It should be noted that these are volunteer positions and HSUS membership or greater philanthropic commitment is required.

Pacelle explained to listeners that this new structure being developed for the District Leader program was very important.  It is not just political.  The Leaders will work with school districts to establish Meatless Mondays; connect with small farmers to unite them against “factory farms;” work with animal shelters on spay/neuter initiatives in the community.  The program is designed to build an army in every community in the United States and it is well underway.

In addition to the District Leaders, HSUS plans to include within this framework County Leaders in all 3,100 counties across the U.S.  Quoting Pacelle, “Our ambition is to have thousands and thousands of people involved.  If we get this done, we’re going to be hell on wheels.”

PLEASE CROSS POST WIDELY
The world not only belongs to those who show up, it's controlled by the best informed and most motivated. Cross posting is encouraged.

Susan Wolf
Sportsmen's & Animal Owners' Voting Alliance
Working to Identify and Elect Supportive Legislators
saova@earthlink.net  or cubhill@earthlink.net

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

Legislation Briefs and Updates June 23, 2014
SAOVA Friends,

Our volunteers are already busy following primary elections and monitoring HSUS/HSLF political contributions. To date contributions to Democrat federal candidates is $92,000 and to Republicans $45,000. Top Senate recipients are Mary Landrieu (D, LA) with $8,000 followed by Senators Kelly Ayotte (R, NH); Thad Cochran (R, MS); Susan Collins (R, ME); and Jack Reed (D, RI) with $3,000. Top recipients among House Members are Jeff Denham (R, CA) with $5,000; Michael Fitzpatrick (R, PA) with $4,000; Earl Blumenhauer (D, OR) with $3,500; and Julia Brownley (D, CA), Peter DeFazio (D, OR), Jim Gerlach (R, PA), Peter Roskam (R, IL), and Kurt Schrader (D, OR) with $3,000. Planning ahead, HSLF contributed $5,000 to the Mikulski for Senate Committee for the 2016 primary.

Notable listing among HSLF independent expenditures is $41,799 supporting the Congressional campaign of Tony Strickland (R, CA).

Who funds HSLF? Many donors are from within the HSUS or from related organizations. Largest donors to date are Carole Baskin (Big Cat Rescue) $10,000; Eric Bernthal, Esq (HSUS Chair of the Board) $10,000; Jeanne and Ed Daniels (animal rights activists) $10,000; Mary Max (HSUS Board of Directors) $10,000; Marian Probst (Fund for Animals) $10,000; Jason Weiss (HSUS Board of Directors) and Donna Weiss $10,000; Peggy Kaplan (HSUS National Council Chair); Richard Kaplan $10,000; and Arthur Benjamin (HSUS
National Council) $5,000.

The world not only belongs to those who show up, it's controlled by the best informed and most motivated.
 
Thanks for reading. Cross posting is encouraged.

Susan Wolf
Sportsmen's & Animal Owners' Voting Alliance
Working to Identify and Elect Supportive Legislators
saova@earthlink.net
cubhill@earthlink.net

HUNTING ON PUBLIC LANDS AT RISK

HSUS has petitioned the Department of the Interior to ban the use of lead ammunition when discharging a firearm on federal lands. The petition, signed by the HSUS, the Fund for Animals, Defenders of Wildlife, the Natural Resources Defense Council, the Wildlife Conservation Society, and others, asks that the federal government mandate the use of non-lead ammunition for the taking of all species in areas managed by the National Park Service and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. This would put one-fifth of the total land
area of the United States off limits to hunters with traditional ammunition.

Last year HSUS successfully lobbied the California legislature to ban the use of lead ammunition.

CALL YOUR OFFICIALS TODAY:

Call Interior Secretary Sally Jewell today at 202-208-3181 and tell her to reject this scientifically baseless petition from HSUS to ban traditional ammunition. Let the Department of the Interior know that requiring the use of alternative, non-lead ammunition, is nothing more than a back-door way to ban hunting by raising the price of participating in an American sporting tradition.

- There is no sound science to support banning traditional ammunition used
by hunters for centuries.

- There is absolutely no adverse wildlife population impact that warrants
such a drastic measure.

- There is no evidence that consuming game taken with traditional ammunition
poses a human health to hunters and their family.

It is not often that we get to share such outstanding news with our readers.  Congratulations to Feld for the very successful close to this long, arduous suit and a historic victory.


Susan Wolf
Sportsmen's & Animal Owners' Voting Alliance
saova@earthlink.net

HUMANE SOCIETY OF THE UNITED STATES AND CO-DEFENDANTS PAY $15.75 MILLION SETTLEMENT TO FELD ENTERTAINMENT ENDING 14 YEARS OF LITIGATION

Unprecedented Settlement Brings Total Paid to Parent Company of Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey® Circus to More Than $25 Million

Groups Settle with Circus After Federal Court Determined Case Was "Groundless and Unreasonable"

VIENNA, Va. - May 15, 2014 - The Humane Society of the United States (HSUS), along with their co-defendants, have paid Feld Entertainment, Inc., the parent company of Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey® Circus, $15.75 million to settle cases stemming from a lawsuit they brought against Ringling Bros.® over the care of its Asian elephants. This historic settlement payment to Feld Entertainment ends nearly 14 years of litigation between the parties.

"We hope this settlement payment, and the various court decisions that found against these animal rights activists and their attorneys, will deter individuals and organizations from bringing frivolous litigation like this in the future," said Kenneth Feld, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Feld Entertainment. "This settlement is a significant milestone for our family-owned business and all the dedicated men and women who care for the Ringling Bros. herd of 42 Asian elephants. We look forward to continuing to set the standard for providing world-class care for all our animals and producing high quality, family entertainment."

HSUS and animal rights groups the Fund for Animals, Animal Welfare Institute, Born Free USA (formerly the Animal Protection Institute), the Wildlife Advocacy Project, the law firm of Meyer, Glitzenstein & Crystal, and several current and former attorneys of that firm, paid the settlement for their involvement in the case brought under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) that the U.S. District Court ruled was "frivolous," "vexatious," and "groundless and unreasonable from its inception." Today's settlement also covers the related Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) case that Feld Entertainment filed against the groups after discovering they had paid a plaintiff for his participation in the original lawsuit and then attempted to conceal those payments.

In December 2012, the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA), a former co-defendant in the case, settled its share of the lawsuits by paying Feld Entertainment $9.3 million. Today's settlement brings the total recovered by Feld Entertainment to more than $25 million in legal fees and expenses, which the company actually spent in defending the ESA case.

"After winning 14 years of litigation, Feld Entertainment has been vindicated.  This case was a colossal abuse of the justice system in which the animal rights groups and their lawyers apparently believed the ends justified the means. It also marks the first time in U.S. history where a defendant in an Endangered Species Act case was found entitled to recover attorneys' fees against  the plaintiffs due to the Court's finding of frivolous, vexatious and unreasonable litigation," said Feld Entertainment's legal counsel in this matter, John Simpson, a partner with Norton Rose Fulbright's Washington, D.C., office. "The total settlement amounts represent recovery of 100 percent of the legal fees Feld Entertainment incurred in defending against the ESA lawsuit."

In the original ESA lawsuit, Feld Entertainment discovered the animal rights groups and their lawyers had paid over $190,000 to a former circus employee, Tom Rider, to be a "paid plaintiff." The Court also found that the animal rights groups and their attorneys "sought to conceal the nature, extent and purpose of the payments" during the litigation. Their abuse of the judicial system included the issuance of a false statement under oath by Rider, assisted by his counsel, who the Court found was "the same attorney who was paying him" to participate in the litigation. The Court found in addition to Rider being a "paid plaintiff," that the lawsuit was "frivolous and vexatious."

http://www.ringlingbrostrialinfo.com/

SAOVA Friends,

Steven L. Kopperud is executive vice president of Policy Directions Inc., a Washington, DC government affairs/specialty communications company specializing in animal production agriculture, nutrition, agribusiness,
biotechnology, animal health and welfare, food, farm policy, trade and ag research and human health-related issues. As a recognized authority on activist assaults on animal agriculture and food technology, Mr. Kopperud
has spoken to audiences in the U.S., Europe, Canada, China, Australia and Latin America on threats to food production.

Kopperud has long been one my favorite voices speaking out against the animal rights agenda and tactics. Never one to mince words, he tells his audience: "You will never negotiate successfully with an animal rights
group."

Thanks for reading. Cross posting is encouraged.

Susan Wolf
Sportsmen's & Animal Owners' Voting Alliance
Working to Identify and Elect Supportive Legislators
saova@earthlink.net
cubhill@earthlink.net

KANGAROO COURTS ARE COMING.
April 18, 2014
By Steve Kopperud

My opinion since moving to Washington, DC - where you can't swing a dead cat without hitting a law school graduate - is the world has enough lawyers.  However, there are times when lawyers are welcome because they're very necessary. Today there's an animal rights initiative just getting legs and its success or failure will likely hinge on whoever has the most - and best - lawyers. I'm talking about the legal concept of animal "personhood."  Stick with me; this may be esoteric and sound comical, but the threat is
nevertheless very real.

"Personhood" under law recognizes only a natural person or "legal personality" has rights, protections, privileges, responsibilities, and legal liability. "Personhood," according to one legal journal, "continues to be a topic of international debate, and has been questioned during the abolition of slavery and the fight for women's rights, in debates about abortion, fetal rights and reproductive rights (and) in animal rights
activism." (my emphasis).

In the 1980s-90s, we beat back an aggressive campaign by PETA and other animal rights groups to achieve "standing" in federal courts to sue on behalf of animals those who transgressed the animal rights philosophy, e.g.  biomedical researchers, farmers and ranchers, zoos, rodeos and other legitimate users of animals. We watched class action suits filed on behalf of unnamed millions of consumers and lots of animals dismissed because the wannabe plaintiffs had no standing.

In the early 2000s, animal rights and real world lawyers sought to change companion animals' legal status from property owned by someone to animals as semi-persons who enjoy not an owner but a "guardian." Some California towns actually enshrined part of this philosophy in local law. The push was to allow owners who brought suit in cases of veterinary negligence or other wrongful acts to sue not just for the property value of the animal lost as is the case today, but for noneconomic damages, i.e. emotional distress, loss of companionship, etc. While pets don't enjoy "personhood," there is a trend in the courts to ignore the animals' legal status and award non-economic damages.

The whole animal-as-person effort is the brainchild of Steven Wise. Wise, who's practiced animal law for over 30 years, heads his own group called the Nonhuman Rights Project (http://www.nonhumanrightsproject.org/). In his own words: 

"Our mission is to change the common law status of at least some nonhuman animals from mere 'things,' which lack the capacity to possess any legal right, to 'persons,' who possess such fundamental rights as bodily integrity and bodily liberty, and those other legal rights to which evolving standards of morality, scientific discovery, and human experience entitle them.The most powerful ram.is the litigating of the capacity for legal rights of those nonhuman animals who are both the most cognitively complex (they have extraordinary minds) and the most cognitively similar to humans. These include the four species of great apes, dolphins and whales, elephants, and African Grey parrots."

Wise's goal is to litigate state by state on behalf of "smart" animals, his targets chosen based on the evolution of common law in that state and whether there's a "plaintiff" of sufficient standing. He's filed three cases in New York, lost one on appeal and the other two appeals are pending. It will only take one or two successes for there to be sea change in the legal status animals, including those we raise for food, use in research to find cures and treatments or those who educate and entertain us.

Animal agriculture must pay attention to this legal threat now. This sounds fanciful, even ridiculous, but remember at least two European nations amended their national constitutions to recognize animals as "sentient creatures." Remember there exists the Animal Legal Defense Fund (ALDF) to provide pro bono (free) legal assistance to animal rights groups, that HSUS and TV game show host Bob Barker have spent literally millions of dollars endowing "animal law" chairs at some of this country's biggest and most prestigious law schools, and the American Bar Association (ABA) has an "animal law committee" and the majority of its members aren't our industry's best legal minds.

Which brings us back to lawyers, numbers and talent. We need to find working attorneys willing to donate - yes, I said donate - time and talent to help us prepare for this assault before someone files a personhood suit on behalf of pigs - deemed by those in the animal rights movement as one of the most intelligent animals we routinely kill and eat.

We need young attorneys and law school students to help us - and the rest of legal animal users - to maintain our legal rights and protections. We're fortunate to have the National Agricultural Law Center at the University of Arkansas (http://nationalaglawcenter.org/). This is a group which needs our attention, our support and our donations. I have a feeling it may be our version of ALDF one day in the future.

Check out the websites I've listed; check the Internet and newsfeeds for "animal law" and "animal personhood." It's a serious issue - at least for the other side - and one that gives the term "kangaroo court" a whole new meaning.

Copyright 2014 Brownfield, All rights Reserved. Written For: Brownfield

Reprinted with Permission
http://brownfieldagnews.com/2014/04/18/kangaroo-courts-coming/

http://tinyurl.com/k69wg4b

SAOVA Friends,
Another year is beginning and promises to see ever increasing pressure and
legislative action by animal activist groups. HSUS sent a missive this
month announcing they had big plans for the year ahead and listed some of
their top priorities for 2014. Their list included:

1. Passing legislation in all 50 states to set so-called "humane" breeding
standards;

2. Banning use of lead ammo for hunting;

3. Fighting the King amendment which would prevent states like California
from imposing their own animal welfare standards on farm goods brought in
from other states;

4. Stopping (ag-gag) bills that prohibit unauthorized video-taping or
delayed cruelty reporting;

5. Securing a ballot initiative to end wolf hunting in Michigan; and a
ballot initiative in Maine to ban bear hunting over bait and with hounds.

Remain alert for activist legislation introduced in your area. SAOVA
monitors a limited number of bills on our website. Working together we can
protect our traditions, avocations and livelihoods from anti-hunting and
anti-animal breeding radicals. The world not only belongs to those who show
up, it's controlled by the best informed and most motivated.

Thanks for reading. Cross posting is encouraged.

Susan Wolf
Sportsmen's & Animal Owners' Voting Alliance
Working to Identify and Elect Supportive Legislators
saova@earthlink.net

Like us on Facebook

Press Release

On December 16, 2013 a Lawsuit was filed in the Federal District Court in Washington DC that asks the Court to declare that the Retail Pet Store Rule is “arbitrary, capricious and inconsistent"  with law, and to remand the Rule back to the USDA.  The Lawsuit also seeks an injunction that would bar the USDA from enforcing the Retail Pet Store Rule.  The "Complaint" in the Lawsuit was filed on behalf of 42 Plaintiffs that consisted of Dog and Cat Clubs, Associations and a Registry.  Those 42 Plaintiffs included nearly 19,000 breeders who potentially would be adversely affected by the Rule.  Those 42 Plaintiffs represent less than 1% of the more than 5,500 Dog and Cat Clubs in the U.S., which supports the assertion that the Rule potentially affects far more than the 4,640 breeders that APHIS stated was the maximum number of breeders who potentially would be affected by the Rule. 

One of the cornerstone assertions in the Complaint is the fact that APHIS failed to document how it arrived at its figure of 4,640 breeders, which figure is exponentially below the number of hobby breeders who potentially could be affect by the Rule.

The Complaint also highlights deficiencies in the flawed cost analysis that woefully underestimated the cost of compliance.   Of note, was APHIS's repeated use of the words "unknown," "not known" and "uncertainty" in the mandatory Regulatory Impact Assessment and Cost Analysis that were prepared by APHIS.  In short, APHIS's Regulatory Impact Assessment and the Cost Analysis are irrevocably flawed.  Another flaw that was cited in the Complaint included the fact that USDA redefined the definition of a "retail pet store" without any statutory authority to do so.

Additional assertions included the failure of APHIS to address a number of issues that were raised in the 1,000s of Public Comments that were submitted to APHIS.  Those issues included, but were not limited to, cost of compliance; privacy; increased risk of spread of deadly diseases; increased risk of harassment by Animal Rights extremists; potential degradation of gene pools and loss of rare breeds; and lingering confusion that necessitated "Webinars" after the effective date of the Rule; and National Security.

Prior to the filing of the Lawsuit, a formal request was made to Secretary Vilsack to place a 60 day moratorium on the enforcement of the Rule, which was based in part on the following sentence:  "Moreover, APHIS's hosting of two webinars after the effective date indicates that it concedes the requirements and scope of the Rule are not easy to understand."   While it is unlikely that the Secretary will grant the request, the request was made to demonstrate an urgent need for injunctive relief.

In addition to the Lawsuit being filed, a Request for an Expedited Hearing will be submitted to the Court. 

We wish to take this opportunity to express our profound appreciation for the financial support of this endeavor by so many Clubs and Individuals.  Thank You!

Associated Dog Clubs of New York State (ADCNYS)

Additional information and updates at http://www.keepourdomesticanimals.com/

[SAOVA_West] Legislation Briefs November 3, 2013‏

SAOVA Friends,

The final pet seller rule goes into effect on November 18, 2013. This rule would extend APHIS authority to include large segments of the retail pet trade as regulated under the Animal Welfare Act (AWA), including pet species as dogs, cats, guinea pigs, rabbits, and hamsters, among others. The overarching intent of the revision is to regulate sight unseen retail pet sales, which, without proof, APHIS claims have dramatically increased as a result of growing Internet usage. APHIS also claims the rule closes a so-called �Internet loophole� and restores the original intent of Congress for administration of the AWA.

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

APHIS Final Rule Revising Pet Seller Exemptions and You

SAOVA Friends,
Since APHIS announced the Final Retail Pet Store Rule a number of commentaries have surfaced as groups and individuals attempt to interpret this rule and provide guidance. The overarching intent of the revision is to regulate sight unseen sales which APHIS claims have dramatically increased as a result of growing internet usage. APHIS has determined that their mission to enforce regulation of listed animal species under the Animal Welfare Act (AWA) now includes those sold in retail as well as commercial markets.

The revised language as set in the APHIS rule now has the force and effect of law. Anything else stated by APHIS staff in response to questions should only be considered as an explanation of pending policy. These policies are not only open to interpretation by individual inspectors, but can be modified by the agency at any time.

Part 3 of the AWA details the Standards of Care for housing, facilities, exercise, cleaning, sanitization, and housekeeping required under USDA/APHIS regulation. Standards will not be revised for home-based retail sellers as APHIS cannot privilege newly licensed breeders over currently licensed breeders. The Final Rule notes: “Several of these commenters suggested that we amend part 3 in the final rule to establish alternate, performance-based standards for dog and cat fanciers and other small-scale residential breeders. We are making no changes in response to these comments. The comments were predicated on an assumption that it will be cost-prohibitive for most residential breeders who are regulated as a result of this rule to meet the standards in part 3; we do not consider that to be the case. (Page 63 of 91)

Below is a short list of noteworthy statements from the Final Rule Discussion of Comments regarding who APHIS intends to license. Access this document at http://www.saova.org/APHIS_rulemaking.html

 Sent: Wed 9/18/13 11:33 AM
  To: saova_west@mailman.montana.com 
 
 APHIS Final Rule Revising Pet Seller Exemptions and You

SAOVA Friends,

As  you know by now, APHIS published the Final Rule September 10, 2013 which revises the definition of "retail pet store" under the Animal Welfare Act (AWA) licensing and regulations. The new definition of retail pet store means a place of business or residence where the seller, buyer, and animal are physically present in the same location. Not only dogs, but cats, rabbits, mice, small exotic animals, and other small pets will no longer be sold at retail without either public or APHIS oversight.  If you cannot qualify for the retail pet store exemption in the AWA by selling only face-to-face, then you must either obtain a federal license or be limited to 4 or fewer females bred and raised on your premises. This limit of 4 is an aggregate number of females regardless of species (i.e., 2 dogs, 1 cat, 1 rabbit).

The transaction does not have to take place at the seller’s home.  A meeting place can be set up to transfer the animal. However, everyone needs to be aware that many municipalities have ordinances restricting sales in public places and should plan accordingly. It appears APHIS will allow a third party to be designated as the agent to stand in for the breeder or buyer in the face-to-face transaction, but this needs additional clarification.

Anyone selling dogs for hunting, breeding, security purposes, or as working dogs is excluded from the definition of Dealer and from the definition of Retail Pet Store.

APHIS held a teleconference to announce the final rule.  If you could not attend, we urge you to read the transcribed call which is posted at the SAOVA website http://tinyurl.com/nyb4s5g

Dear SAOVA Friends,

The IRS scandal continues to unfold in Washington with Congressional hearings underway and now investigation by the FBI into IRS actions and targeting of certain nonprofits. Discovery that the Director of the IRS division implicated in using the improper targeting,  Lois Lerner, is an active member of HSUS raised questions whether she used her position to run interference for HSUS.

 Rep. Blaine Luetkemeyer (R-MO) wrote a letter to Lerner the year before asking that HSUS’s political spending
be scrutinized. Lerner took no action. In response, Rep. Luetkemeyer wrote another letter to the Treasury Secretary and the Inspector General for Tax Administration renewing his call for an investigation of HSUS.

 In his weekly column, Luetkemeyer writes, “Three years ago, a number of constituents brought to my attention their concerns that the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) was involved in political and lobbying activities that were in direct violation of its 501(c)3 tax-except status that prohibits such activities. To be clear, HSUS is not affiliated with your local animal shelter.  In fact, only 1 percent of the money HSUS raises makes its way to animal shelters at all. Instead, it spends millions of dollars on lobbying, ballot initiatives, and other political activities.  For three years, and after providing the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) with more than 3,000 pages of documents exposing HSUS’ activities and calling for an investigation, the agency told me they could not discuss ongoing investigations and were also unable to confirm or deny whether or not an investigation was underway.” 

Luetkemeyer continues, “This is the worst kind of government abuse that I have ever encountered in my more than two decades in public service and I am determined to get to the bottom of things on behalf of those folks who came to me three years ago with these allegations.”   http://luetkemeyer.house.gov 

Please write to your own Congressman and ask why the IRS has ignored the repeated requests of Congressman Luetkemeyer to act upon the allegations that the HSUS was involved in political and lobbying activities that were in direct violation of its 501(c)3 tax-except status that prohibits such activities. A thorough investigation is needed to resolve this issue and to restore the faith and trust in our government.

 The world not only belongs to those who show up, it's controlled by the best informed and most motivated. 
Thanks for reading.
 Cross posting is encouraged. 
 
Susan Wolf
Sportsmen's & Animal Owners' Voting Alliance
 Working to Identify and Elect Supportive Legislators
 saova@earthlink.net

SAOVA 2012 CONGRESSIONAL CHAMPION AWARDS

SAOVA is proud to honor the members of Congress who received "Congressional Champion" awards. 

Our award winners understand firsthand the many challenges facing Americans involved in all facets of the animal industry in addition to those issues of significance to sportsmen. 

Hunters, ranchers, producers, retailers, along with animal owners from all walks of life are being confronted today at an unprecedented pace by overzealous animal rights legislation. 

The selected Congressmen have clearly demonstrated their commitment to continue efforts to preserve and protect property rights and assure continuation of our livelihoods, hobbies, and sporting heritage. 

The following message from Congressman Don Young (AK) exemplifies  this commitment: "I am honored and blessed to receive this award from SAOVA. 

As an avid outdoorsman and Congressman for the 'last frontier', I look forward to continuing to work on these issues important to SAOVA, and  protecting the rights of animal owners and sportsmen across the country." 
 

Our award winners have continually displayed outstanding leadership and courage, making informed decisions by relying on facts and not emotional half-truths. We are indeed grateful to the members of Congress who
represent our interests fairly and work to protect our traditions.  


Please join SAOVA by sending a note of appreciation to our 2012
Congressional Champions:
 

Senator Roy Blunt  (MO)

Senator Saxby Chambliss (GA)

Senator Tom Coburn  (OK)

Senator Mike Johanns (NE)

Senator Jerry Moran  (KS)

Senator Jeff Sessions (AL)

Congressman Bob Goodlatte  (VA)

Congressman Steve King (IA)

Congressman Jack Kingston (GA)

Congressman Don Young (AK)


More at SAOVA Legislative
Awards http://www.saova.org/awards.html

Cross posting is encouraged. 
 
Susan Wolf
Sportsmen's & Animal Owners' Voting Alliance
Working to Identify and Elect Supportive
Legislators
saova@earthlink.net  

Hey Folks,

There is a movement to place animals on the same level as humans by granting them Legal Rights under the law.  Your cat or dog could sue you, because they will have a right to a trial---all driven by Trial Lawyers...
.Rob T.  

Dear SAOVA Friends,

In their end of year report, AVMA noted approximately 40,000 bills are projected to be enacted into law this year out of 150,000 bills introduced, many of which were related to animals and veterinary medicine. Below is a sample of the report highlights:

Iowa and Utah adopted bills that prohibit a person from obtaining employment at an agricultural facility under false pretenses in order to record images or commit any other act not authorized by the owner of the agricultural facility. Missouri took a somewhat different approach by requiring employees who videotape suspected animal abuse to provide the unedited recording to law enforcement within 24 hours.

Nebraska became the second state to enact legislation prohibiting local governments from defining legal status of animals in a way that is not consistent with personal property.

Legislators in 10 states introduced bills that would restrict tethering of companion animals. 
 
Delaware and Rhode Island adopted laws that provide penalties for confining or tethering a dog for more than a set number of hours.  

Tennessee adopted a bill that provides that noneconomic damages are not permitted for any claim arising out of harm or loss of property, except as authorized by statute.  Courts in North Carolina and New Jersey ruled against expanding emotion-based damages in pet litigation, while an appeals court in Texas accepted the award of sentimental damages in such cases. The Texas Supreme Court has been asked to review the opinion as contrary to established precedent in the state and has scheduled oral argument for early next year.

Massachusetts adopted legislation making it the 45th state to specifically allow for the creation of
pet trusts for the care of animals.  

Full report at AVMA website: http://tinyurl.com/b95boxn

Related Posts:
[SAOVA_West] Animal Law in the News‏
[SAOVA_West] HR 835 PUPS Call to action September 24,  2012
[SAOVA_West]  News Briefs; APHIS proposed rule updates‏
SAOVA  Alert the  Animal Welfare Act (AWA) licensing and regulations