Your RIGHTS

               OPPOSE PAWS               

Legislative Updates - PAWS

Immediate Actions Needed - PAWS Update 10/23/2005

A couple of days ago we received notification that Senator Santorum has scheduled a hearing for PAWS on November 8, 2005 at 2:30 pm for the Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry Research, Nutrition, and General Legislation Subcommittee. We expect, and current information suggests we are correct, that the hearing would be stacked with PAWS supporters. To our knowledge NO ONE IN OPPOSITION TO PAWS has been scheduled to talk.

It is imperative that everyone contact the Subcommittee to request that your views be made part of the Official Public Record. FAX is preferred! Clubs and individuals need to flood the Subcommittee with letters in opposition to PAWS. Previous letters, faxes, calls will not be a part of the Official Public Record.

Title your Statement -  "Senate Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry Subcommittee Hearing on S1139 (PAWS)"
Fax to: (202) 228-8282

Send your Statement also to Senator Santorum's Aide, Jeff Stoltzfoos, by email to Jeff_Stoltzfoos@santorum.senate.gov  Your Statement will be included in the members' briefing books and made part of the PAWS hearing record.


To send letters by email to the Senate Agriculture Committee Aides the LobbyNow system established by the Doberman Pinscher Club of America makes it easy. http://dpca.lobbynow.com/issues?PAWS/senate/agcommittee


Tell the Subcommittee members, including Senator Santorum, that the AKC, HSUS, ASPCA, PETA, DDAL and the AVMA do not represent the views of hundreds of clubs, organizations, registries, rescue groups and thousands of individuals who oppose the PAWS bill.


Senator Santorum has said some modifications and clarifications will be proposed during this hearing but we have not seen the language.

Points to make:

we oppose federal regulation of breeders selling direct to the public at the retail level no matter what clarifications or adjustments in the proposed thresholds are made

PAWS is detrimental to thousands of hobby breeders raisin cats and dogs in their homes who would be subjected to USDA inspection and the Animal Welfare Act commercial facilities of care which are inappropriate for the home environment

There is no credible evidence to support the claims of PAWS supporters that huge numbers of dogs and cats are sold directly to the public at retail through the Internet. The Internet is not inherently evil. The Internet merely provides a vehicle of communication and education concerning pet selection.

The Animal Welfare Act appropriately, and should continue, to license commercial wholesalers of dogs/cats to the pet retailers, brokers and transporters of animals. The USDA should not regulate retail breeders selling directly to the public or rescues (individuals or organizations).

News on Co-Sponsors:

The list of co-sponsors continue to grow at an alarming rate. 20 new cosponsors in October alone! In addition to sending your faxes for the hearing above, you must let your Senators and Representatives know of your opposition and request that they oppose PAWS. If they are a co-sponsor, ask that they revoke their sponsorship of PAWS. This is not a substitute for getting your views included as part of the Official Public Record above.

Below is the list of cosponsors.

Senate:

Sen Santorum, Rick [PA] (introduced 5/26/2005)      Cosponsors (9)
Sen Durbin, Richard [IL] - 6/6/2005 Sen Specter, Arlen [PA] - 6/24/2005
Sen Feinstein, Dianne [CA] - 7/11/2005 Sen Dole, Elizabeth [NC] - 7/27/2005
Sen DeWine, Mike [OH] - 9/19/2005 Sen Allard, Wayne [CO] - 9/27/2005
Sen Bingaman, Jeff [NM] - 10/7/2005 Sen Ensign, John [NV] - 10/17/2005
Sen Bayh, Evan [IN] - 10/19/2005

House

Rep Gerlach, Jim [PA-6] (introduced 5/26/2005)      Cosponsors (62)
Rep Farr, Sam [CA-17] - 5/26/2005 Rep Sabo, Martin Olav [MN-5] - 6/24/2005
Rep Fitzpatrick, Michael G. [PA-8] - 6/30/2005 Rep Platts, Todd Russell [PA-19] - 7/11/2005
Rep Filner, Bob [CA-51] - 7/11/2005 Rep Carter, John R. [TX-31] - 7/14/2005
Rep Moore, Dennis [KS-3] - 7/14/2005 Rep Miller, Brad [NC-13] - 7/20/2005
Rep Miller, George [CA-7] - 7/20/2005 Rep Berman, Howard L. [CA-28] - 7/20/2005
Rep Schakowsky, Janice D. [IL-9] - 7/20/2005 Rep Owens, Major R. [NY-11] - 7/20/2005
Rep Rangel, Charles B. [NY-15] - 7/20/2005 Rep Frank, Barney [MA-4] - 7/29/2005
Rep Moran, James P. [VA-8] - 7/29/2005 Rep Harris, Katherine [FL-13] - 7/29/2005
Rep Schwarz, John J.H. "Joe" [MI-7] - 7/29/2005 Rep Wasserman Schultz, Debbie [FL-20] - 7/29/2005
Rep Nadler, Jerrold [NY-8] - 7/29/2005 Rep Berkley, Shelley [NV-1] - 7/29/2005
Rep Kildee, Dale E. [MI-5] - 7/29/2005 Rep Langevin, James R. [RI-2] - 9/8/2005
Rep Engel, Eliot L. [NY-17] - 9/8/2005 Rep Lee, Barbara [CA-9] - 9/8/2005
Rep Shays, Christopher [CT-4] - 9/8/2005 Rep Rothman, Steven R. [NJ-9] - 9/8/2005
Rep Van Hollen, Chris [MD-8] - 9/8/2005 Rep Eshoo, Anna G. [CA-14] - 9/8/2005
Rep McNulty, Michael R. [NY-21] - 9/8/2005 Rep McCollum, Betty [MN-4] - 9/8/2005
Rep Capps, Lois [CA-23] - 9/8/2005 Rep Menendez, Robert [NJ-13] - 9/8/2005
Rep Stark, Fortney Pete [CA-13] - 9/8/2005 Rep Everett, Terry [AL-2] - 9/15/2005
Rep Tauscher, Ellen O. [CA-10] - 9/15/2005 Rep Payne, Donald M. [NJ-10] - 9/15/2005
Rep Murphy, Tim [PA-18] - 9/22/2005 Rep King, Peter T. [NY-3] - 9/22/2005
Rep Cummings, Elijah E. [MD-7] - 9/22/2005 Rep Lynch, Stephen F. [MA-9] - 9/22/2005
Rep Roybal-Allard, Lucille [CA-34] - 9/29/2005 Rep LoBiondo, Frank A. [NJ-2] - 9/29/2005
Rep Napolitano, Grace F. [CA-38] - 9/29/2005 Rep Sherman, Brad [CA-27] - 9/29/2005
Rep Carson, Julia [IN-7] - 9/29/2005 Rep Brown, Henry E., Jr. [SC-1] - 10/7/2005
Rep Evans, Lane [IL-17] - 10/7/2005 Rep Kucinich, Dennis J. [OH-10] - 10/7/2005
Rep Andrews, Robert E. [NJ-1] - 10/7/2005 Rep Blumenauer, Earl [OR-3] - 10/7/2005
Rep Smith, Christopher H. [NJ-4] - 10/17/2005 Rep Pallone, Frank, Jr. [NJ-6] - 10/17/2005
Rep Norton, Eleanor Holmes [DC] - 10/17/2005 Rep Olver, John W. [MA-1] - 10/17/2005
Rep Emanuel, Rahm [IL-5] - 10/17/2005 Rep Dicks, Norman D. [WA-6] - 10/17/2005
Rep Maloney, Carolyn B. [NY-14] - 10/17/2005 Rep Schiff, Adam B. [CA-29] - 10/17/2005
Rep Allen, Thomas H. [ME-1] - 10/20/2005 Rep Brady, Robert A. [PA-1] - 10/20/2005
Rep Clyburn, James E. [SC-6] - 10/20/2005 Rep Ryan, Tim [OH-17] - 10/20/2005

Kelly Crouch

Chair, TICA Legislative Committee

10/23/2005


 

 

Do you know that the time may soon come when you can not go to a breeder and buy a puppy or kitten to join your family?  Why you may ask - because there are Bills currently in the House and Senate that will take that RIGHT AWAY FROM YOU!

The PAWS Statue Senate Bill 1139 and House Bill 2669 will effect over 90% of hobby breeders, basically taking away our right to breed healthy, socialized pets.  It will make it so that a breeder can NO LONGER breed a litter in their home, but must meet housing regulations (see below  USDA Current Regulations) which would mean raising kittens in a kennel type environment. http://www.cfainc.org/articles/legislative/petlover-alert.pdf   While this may be fine for puppies, kittens raised in this type of environment will often be almost feral in personality.  Kittens aren't allowed to be around other cats, other then their mom, dogs or anything of that nature, which help in providing a social outgoing pet.  It will make it so that bringing in outcrosses to improve your lines and health will be a BAD thing.  These are just A FEW of the changes this Bill will bring into effect if passed.  This Bill will also effect RESCUES and put most of them out of business too http://www.cfainc.org/articles/legislative/rescue-alert.pdf .

The "Pet Animal Welfare Statute of 2005" (PAWS)
Senate Bill 1139/House Bill 2669 - May 2005

The "Pet Animal Welfare Statute" (PAWS) is a bill to amend the federal Animal Welfare Act. The AWA currently regulates large-scale commercial breeders who sell pets at wholesale. PAWS would dramatically change the concept of the AWA as established by Congress. It would require federal licensing and inspection of the private homes of many hobby breeders. Until now no federal license has been required to breed cats and dogs in a private residence and sell retail to the public. PAWS would change that for many in the cat and dog fancy. PAWS will also have an impact on rescue organizations, requiring licensing of many of these as retail sellers. PAWS will require in-home breeders and rescue that fall within the number limits being established to follow AWA standards. These standards are written for commercial establishments and not in-home facilities. Compliance with commercial regulations will be difficult if not impossible for rescue and small, private cat and dog hobby breeders. See

FAQ on Pet Animal Welfare Statute (PAWS) - PDF format

PAWS 2005 Integrated with current regulations - PDF format

PAWS Definition for Dealer - Succinct, note absence of allowances for rehoming a pet that you did not breed. This impacts breeders AND in-home rescue. PDF format

RESCUERS take note:

Rescuers definitely need to be concerned about PAWS. There's absolutely no question that PAWS adversely effects rescuers. AWA and the U.S. commercial code consider any property transaction for consideration a sale. That's what most rescue placements with adoption fees are. Motivation, tax and non profit status don't change that situation. Previously, because all dog "sellers" were classed as AWA licensed or non-licensed as a function to whether the transfer was a retail or wholesale one, virtually all dog sellers, including rescuers, were non-licensed.

PAWS abandons that wholesale-retail determination for one based on the numbers of dogs sold in a calendar year. They can be from your breeding, another person's, or rescues. It will no longer matter whether the sales are at wholesale or retail. Any individual or organization that "sells" more that 25 dogs per year is required to have a federal license and is subject to all the inspection and record keeping requirements of commercial kennels. -- Bob Kane, SAOVA

Wonder what the regulations are if PAWS requires you to be licensed? USDA current regulations

Legislative Alert from Cat Fanciers Association (CFA) June 2, 2005 - PDF format

CFA Letter to the AKC Board of Directors - June 8, 2005

DFOW Letter to the AKC Board of Directors - June 7, 2005

Legislative Alert from SAOVA - June 7, 2005

National Animal Interest Alliance Position Statement on PAWS

Case Law establishing that it was NOT the intent of Congress to regulate in-home breeders - Doris Day Animal V Veneman Ann

(6/26/05) NO PAWS Commentary by NCRAOA (10 page PDF with quotes and bullet points)

(6/26/05) Attn: Parent Club members: The 4% Myth by Bill Fawcett (PDF from smythwicks.org)

new! Attn: All AKC Clubs: The AKC, Your Privacy, and Their Legislative Agenda - Is Nothing Sacred?

TAKE ACTION NOW

PAWS was read in the Senate on May 26, 2005 and has been referred to the Senate Subcommittee on Research, Nutrition, and General Legislation.

Currently, we ask that you contact ALL Senate Ag Committee members

When you write let them KNOW you OPPOSE PAWS. Ask your Senators and Representative to NOT co-sponsor the bill and to vote AGAINST it if it comes up.

You may also phone the Senate Ag Committee - 202-224-2035

"I am calling to OPPOSE S. 1139, the Pet Animal Welfare bill." You probably won't even be asked your name. Can you get friends, co-workers, family members to make calls as well?

Ideally, you should phone AND write .

Need help writing your letter? Here are sample letters from NCRAOA to help you get started.

bullet Sample Letter 1
bullet Sample Letter 2
bullet Sample Letter 3

Guidelines for making your contact count:

  1. BE POLITE. The PAWS turkey makes us all angry but that anger should not be directed at Legislators. They are just doing what we pay them to do -- considering a law that some people say would be a good idea.
     
  2. BE SHORT. Only a few emails or letters will be read to the end and very few indeed will be seen by the congressman himself. The shorter yours is, the better its chances. Letters should be not over one page, emails not over two screens full.
     
  3. BE VERY CLEAR -- especially about the fact that you OPPOSE (or are AGAINST) the PAWS bill.
     
  4. SEND YOUR EMAIL (or letter) to all committee members AND to your own Senator and Representative.
     
  5. EMAIL and FAX are recommended.

WANT TO DO MORE?  WANT TO STAY ON TOP OF THESE TYPES OF LEGISTLATIONS THAT WILL TAKE AWAY YOUR RIGHTS?  GO TO:  www.pet-law.com    Join their pet law list for your state and follow their suggestions!  Remember if you don't fight NOW, you may soon lose your RIGHTS to have the fur kids you LOVE.

ANIMIAL RIGHTS vs ANIMAL WELFARE

I don't think that any of us would argue that it is wrong to harm an animal.  Most of us love our little furkids and if anything spoil them rotten.  It is why groups like PETA  and the Humane Society  find so much support, from Hollywood Stars, Politicians and maybe YOU? The problem with this support is you are supporting Animal Right advocates NOT Animal Welfare groups.  Most people don't  know the difference and believe that BOTH of these groups are fighting to help keep animals safe, but this IS NOT the case! What AR advocates are fighting for is the total end of human/animal relationships in ANY form!  Groups like PETA  do NOT want to see conditions for pets improve they want to see a society where there ARE NO PETS!  These are the people behind bills like the above PAWS Bill:

Animal Rights advocates do not distinguish between human beings and animals. In the words of Ingrid Newkirk, founder of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PeTA):

"Animal liberationists do not separate out the human animal, so there is no rational basis for saying that a human being has special rights. A rat is a pig is a dog is a boy. They're all mammals."(Vogue, September 1989)

"Pet ownership is an absolutely abysmal situation brought on by human manipulation."
(Washingtonian Magazine, August 1986)

"In the end, I think it would be lovely if we stopped this whole notion of pets altogether."   (Newsday, Feb. 21, 1988)

"If anybody wonders about what's with all these reforms, you can hear us clearly. Our goal is total animal liberation."
(Animal Rights 2002 national convention, US)

"I don't use the word 'pet.' I think it's specieist language. I prefer 'companion animal.' For one thing, we would no longer allow breeding ... as the surplus of cats and dogs declined, eventually companion animals would be phased out, and we would return to a more symbiotic relationship - enjoyment at a distance."
(In "Just Like Us? Toward a Notion of Animal Rights", Harper's Magazine, August 1988)

"The bottom line is that people don't have the right to manipulate or to breed dogs and cats ... If people want toys, they should buy inanimate objects. If they want companionship, they should seek it with their own kind." ("Animals", May/June 1993)

Wayne Pacelle, Chief Executive Officer since April 2004 (joined HSUS 1994; 1988-94, Fund for Animals) said:

"We have no ethical obligation to preserve the different breeds of livestock produced through selective breeding. ... One generation and out. We have no problem with the extinction of domestic animals. They are creations of human selective breeding." (Quoted in Animal People, May, 1993)

Animal Welfare philosophy is fundamentally different from the animal rights philosophy, since it endorses the responsible use of animals to satisfy certain human needs. These range from companionship and sport, to uses which involve the taking of life, such as for food, clothing and medical research. Animal welfare means ensuring that all animals used by humans have their basic needs fulfilled in terms of food, shelter and health, and that they experience no unnecessary suffering in providing for human needs.

The American Veterinary Medical Association Policy on Animal Welfare and Animal Rights describes animal welfare as: "... a human responsibility that encompasses all aspects of animal well-being, including proper housing, management, nutrition, disease prevention and treatment, responsible care, humane handling, and, when necessary, humane euthanasia."

Animal Welfare groups support the humane treatment and care for animals.  They recognize that people have the RIGHT to have a say in how they treat their animals as OWNERS NOT Guardians.