KC DOG BLOG

KCMO Press Release on the Halfway Home Pet Adoptions Transition

This morning, KCMO released its official statement on the Halfway Home Pet Adoption transition.

Thus far, nothing has changed since they first announced the process for selecting a new permanent group to run the city shelter.

As a city, they are certaily saying the right things, and recognizing a large and growing push to make the city shelter a No Kill shelter. And they've put it in writing.  It is now our responsibility over the next few months to be sure we continue to push them toward making a smart decision on which vendor is most suited and experienced at achieving that goal.

-----------------------------------------------------------------

News from City Hall
City Communications Office
City of Kansas City, Mo.
www.kcmo.org
CONTACT: City Communications, 816-513-1349
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: April 28, 2011

Halfway Home Pet Adoptions transition

The City of Kansas City, Mo., contract with the current operator of Halfway Home Pet Adoptions, Kansas City's animal shelter, expires on Saturday, April 30, 2011. The City has made arrangements to assume control of the shelter at the end of the contract. The City will run the shelter until a contract can be executed to establish a new vendor to operate it.

As part of the process to secure a new operator, a Request for Information (RFI) was issued by the City and responses are due April 28, 2011. Information obtained through the RFI will be used to prepare and issue a Request for Proposals (RFP). A new vendor will be selected from those who respond to the RFP.

It is the City's intent to ensure the shelter operates as efficiently as possible while ensuring the humane treatment of animals housed there and to facilitate the adoption of as many animals as possible when they are not claimed by their owners.

Many have called for the shelter to become a "no-kill" operation. While the volume of animals that enter the shelter may make it difficult to operate as a no-kill shelter, the City will strive to achieve this as a goal. Under the current contract, the euthanasia rate for dogs fell from 57 percent to 21 percent and from 78 percent to 65 percent for cats. Other shelters, rescue organizations and animal welfare groups have offered to help. Assistance from these crucial partners is appreciated.

Concerns have been expressed about respiratory illnesses and other diseases in the animals housed at the shelter. A new veterinarian will examine all of the animals, order laboratory tests and prescribe treatment and operational changes as needed to control diseases that may be found.

The City's animal shelter facility was constructed in 1973 and was not designed for the long term sheltering of animals. Updates and equipment replacement are needed. An inspector with the Missouri Department of Agriculture will inspect the facility during the first week in May to identify deficiencies that need to be corrected. It is anticipated that this will result in unbudgeted expenditures, but the City is committed to making the necessary corrections to the fullest extent possible.

The public is encouraged to assist by adopting a dog or cat and keeping pet licenses up to date. Adopting a dog or cat from an animal shelter saves it from an unpleasant outcome. Adoptable dogs and cats can be found by searching at www.Petfinder.com.

Revenue from pet licenses provides the funding for the operation of the shelter. Only about 10 percent of the dogs and cats in Kansas City are licensed as required by city ordinance. Getting more pets licensed will help ensure funds are available to provide the proper level of care for animals that are brought to the animal shelter. All pet owners are urged to ensure their pets are currently licensed.

The shelter will be closed on Sunday May 1, 2011, while transition activities are underway.

As of Monday May 2, 2011 business hours for the shelter will be:

- Monday thru Thursday 12 - 6 p.m.
- Friday and Saturday 12 - 4 p.m.
- Closed on Sunday

Off-site adoption events for Sundays are planned. The City is exploring ways to extend business hours beyond 6 p.m. during the week.

To report any animal-related issues, contact the City's 3-1-1 Action Center, by dialing 311 or 816-513-1313. To report animal-related issues afterhours (7 p.m. to 7 a.m. Monday through Friday) and on the weekend, please call 911. To contact the animal shelter directly, please call 816-921-0201.

Media inquiries should be directed to David Park, the director of the Neighborhood and Community Services Department, 816-513-3231.
 

Update: Governor Nixon Signs SB 113, SB 161 now awaits his signature

In amazingly swift government reaction, SB 161 has now been approved by both houses of congress.  the House voted 108 to 42 (72% approval) today to pass SB 161 (the Governor's Compromise Bill).  The Bill then went to the Senate, which passed the bill 24-10 (71%). The bill then returns to the Governor's desk where everyone expects him to sign it (he did write and submit it). 

Original post:

Today, Governor Nixon signed SB 113.

The bill makes some pretty significant changes to voter-approved Prop B. While many are upset over some of the things lost in the change, there were also some pretty significant enforcement upgrades in SB 113 that will make improvements for the dogs in this state.

Meanwhile, the Governor's Compromise bill, which adds some of the animal protection elements of Prop B back into the law has been tacked onto state bill SB 161 and is now being heard by the congress. While not popular with some of the national organizations, the changes in SB 161 were strongly supported by several state animal welfare groups -- including MAAL and Humane Society of Missouri.

In fact -- here is MAAL's press release to its members and followers to support SB 161.

It may not be perfect. Nothing ever is. But I think if SB 161 passes (and I have no reason to believe it won't), it will provide a few legal upgrades over the current law that will be beneficial to the dogs - -and more importantly, some major enforcement upgrades that will definitely improve Missouri's situation of poorly run and managed commercial breeding operations.

At this point, with Prop B dead, there is absolutely no reason to not support SB 161 and lets get some better laws, and enforcement in place.

 

So what is the Companion Animal Protection Act?

Over the past couple of months, several states including New York, Texas and Rhode Island have begun looking at passing the Companion Animal Protection Act (CAPA).  A similar bill was passed in Deleware last year.

But with all of the talk about CAPA, I have neglegently failed to post an overview of the law on this blog.

That is changing right now. Now, by all means, don't take my word for the law. Read the template for the law in its entirety here (it's only 11 pages, so won't take you long).

In a nutshell, CAPA seeks to legislate shelters following the No Kill Equation. The tenets of the No Kill Equation are really not controversial. All of the tenets are known to be successful in their own right, including comprehensie adoption opportunities, foster care programs, shelter socialization, proper shelter cleaning, medical care and rehabilitation for treatable animals, TNR programs, owner retention programs, proactive return to owner policies and good public relations programs.

CAPA is sadly necessary because there are still far too many shelters that are absolutely failing in too many of these areas -- many because of non-caring, non-compassionate leadership. 

So here are the key points of CAPA:

 1) Requires all dogs, cats and rabbits to be altered prior to adoption unless there is a health reason as cited by a licensed veterinarian and such sterilizations must be performed by a licensed veterinarian.

2) Allows for the care of feral cats

3) Requires a 5 day holding period for impounded strays - -with a variety of different provisions for young animals that are not weened and for those that are irremediably suffering.

4) Requires the same holding period for animals that are relinquished by their owners for euthanasia if the animal is determined to be in good health and not aggressive.

5) Requires proper treatment of  injuries and diseases and cleanliness of kennels (cleaned no less than twice per day) for animals in the shelter.

6) Require a shelter to provide 48 hours advance notice to regular shelter and rescue contacts (either by phone or via email) prior to euthanizing an animal. Then, if another shelter or rescue agrees to take an animal that is to be killed, the animal must be surrendered to that organization with no pull fee.  Shelters or rescues may be excluded if any of the organization's current directors or officers have been convicted of any type of cruelty or neglect for animals.

7) Forbids public or private shelters from limiting or obstructing adoptions for any animal based on arbitrary criteria such as breed, age, color or any other criteria other medical condition or aggression -- or the adopter's fitness to adopt.

8) Requires shelters or rescues to promote animals for adoption and requires them to be open for adoption seven says a week, a minimum of six hours per day, requires evening and weekend adoption hours and off-site adoption events.

9) Prevents an animal from being killed if there are empty cages or kennels, available foster homes, or other organization willing to take the animal.

10) Requires an animal to be killed via lethal injection (not the gas chamber or other method of killing).

11) Requires public accountability so shelters must make public the number of animals impounded each year and how many were adopted, returned to owner, transferred to other rescue groups, reclaimed by their owners , lost, stolen or killed -- and posted in a conspicuous and observable spot. This information must be presented to any owner surrending an animal to the shelter. 

12) Requires revenues from dog licenses to go back to animal control and used for low cost spay/neuter services.

There's obviously a lot more to the bill - -but this is the gist.

Almost all of this makes 100% sense -- and is just mandating by law programs that are proven to work and be successful at saving animal lives. Unfortunately there are still opponents to this law.

-----------------------

The big three organizations, HSUS, ASPCA and Best Friends have opposed versions of CAPA in the past, and emails suggest that at least HSUS is working behind the scenes in Texas to oppose CAPA.

Some of the opposition, at least in New York, centered around the name of the law.  The name "Oreo's law" was centered around a specific dog that was "rescued" by the ASPCA, then killed after being physically rehabed because the ASPCA deemed Oreo to be too aggressive.  A New York area group, Pet's Alive, offered to take in Oreo and help her with her rehabilitiation, but was deniied. And Oreo was killed.

Thus, the ASPCA opposed "Oreo's Law". Best Friends opposed the law too -- in part because the ASPCA did, and in part because of a concern that they, and the ASPCA had with the law.

According to language crafted by Gregory Castle at Best Friends, centers around provision #6 above. As Castle wrote:

"One (reason)was the language around who would be approved to claim an animal from a shelter. The Kellner/Duane Bill allowed any animal 501(c)3 to do so, but excluded competent rescues that weren’t federally tax exempt. Having that designation does not reflect an organization’s ability to handle animals and see them adopted into good, loving homes. A 501(c)3 is merely a tax designation and says nothing about the organization’s track record or skill to do right by the animals, especially animals that might need a little extra care. That doesn’t even account for those out there who might take advantage of such a loophole for unscrupulous reasons."

Now, I'm not going to deny that there are organizations (or people), disguised as 501c3 organizations, that are involved in unscupulous behavior. The writers of CAPA agreed, and even put in the clause that if anyone on their board has ever been convicted of animal cruelty or neglect, they can be excluded. This leaves only the "questionable" 501c3s that have never been convicted as being of concern -- that is keeping the rest of the bill from passing.

While I'm sure there are problem groups out there (I do know of a couple), there are currently cruelty laws on the books in every state to deal with those folks.  And they should be dealt with -- regardless of whether CAPA exists or not. Let's face it, if someone wants animals for "unscrupulous reasons" or for hoarding, or whatever, there is no shortage of animals out there for them to get their hands on. This small number of "rescue" organizations should be dealt with -- with, or without, CAPA.

On the flip side, there are literally hundreds of thousands of animals that are getting killed in public and private shelters every year because the shelters are not making even basic efforts to save lives. CAPA would mandate that they do.

For weeks now, Yesbiscuit! has been writing about the ongoing slaughter at the Memphis animal shelter (you can read a list of 'concerns' here)  -- and everything they're doing is a) legal under the current law and b) avoidable if a law like CAPA was passed.

But Memphis is far from an isolated example.

In Kansas City, our shelter temporarily shut out volunteers after allegations of abuse arose -- causing hundreds of animals to get less care than they were getting with the volunteer support. In Ohio, more than 80% of the county shelters kill dogs solely based on breed -- this is common in many areas including a shelter in Virginia that fought for the right to kill all 'pit bulls', in Little Rock, Houston, Springfield, MO and others. There are countless shelters that prefer to not work with rescue groups, and never post adoptables online, or let people know before animals are killed. There are many more that keep half of their kennels empty at all times to make it easier to move animals to different cages every morning so they can more easily clean dirty cages.  I'm sure nearly every reader of this blog has an example of virtually all of these in their own community.

And all of this is completely legal and without regime change, cannot be solved.

So while I don't want to completely dismiss Best Friends' concerns, there are solutions to the small number of bad 501c3's out there who are causing problems -- whereas CAPA provides a very viable solution to the much larger issues of public and private shelters that are not even trying. 

CAPA is a good, smart law -- already passed in the state of Delaware-- and deserves support in Rhode Island, Texas, New York and elsewhere when it is proposed.

For more:

Mandating Collaboration - Winograd

Fallout from Oreo's Law teaches us that old habits die hard - KC Dog Blog

Why I love CAPA - -Reason 547 - Yesbiscuit! (because shelters literally have to exhaust all reasonable alternatives to save healthy/treatable pets before killing).

Ending Sheltery Tyranny over Rescuers -- Winograd

New Mexico Woman killed by pack of dogs

It had been pretty quiet on this front for the past couple of months, but this is the second fatality story in as many days.

On Sunday afternoon, 48 year old Margaret Salcedo was fatally attacked by four dogs -- described by the media as "mixed breed pit bulls". The attack occurred in Truth or Consequences, NM.

The four dogs were apparently roaming at large while the owners were out of town and attacked Ms. Salcedo. One onlooker called 911 for help, but help arrived too late (although response time was pretty quick by most standards).

When a healthy adult is killed in an incident like this, it is often a group of dogs involved vs a singular dog -- and large groups of dogs roaming at large can obviously be a problem - as it clearly was in this case.

I also often point out that incidents like this often occur in poverty-stricken areas -- where there are some dog owners who do not have the same standards of care for their dogs as I think most of us would prefer (this is not to imply that low-income pet owners can't be good owners, only to note that irresponsibe ownership is more common in these areas than in affluent ones). In this case, Truth or Consequences has 23% of their population living below the poverty line -- which is nearly double the national average.

My heart goes out to the family and friends of Ms. Solcedo.

This story has been picked up by nearly 200 media outlets across the country and in the UK and Canada.

Updated: Ardmore, OK man dead from dog attack

Update: So, this link has video of the scene. There are other dogs on the property (it is unlikely that either of these dogs was involved in the actual attack). The dogs are very much mixed breed mongrel-type dogs based on the video footage. And it is safe to say that the living environment for these dogs is questionable, at best.

A 50 year old man, Virgil Cantrell, died on Saturday from an apparent fatal dog attack.

The dog, described as a "pit bull", was chained to the front porch of the home while its owners were gone. The victim either came up toward the porch, or was simply walking by the house (did the chained dog have a chain long enough to reach the sidewalk?) -- but the dog was still chained when authorities arrived to help the man.

Cantrell died in route to the Denton, TX hospital -- and could not be airlifted because high winds had all planes grounded.

Records indicate two previous calls to the residence for dog bites.

Ardemore has a fairly high crime rate for such a small community -- with nearly double the crime rate of the national average. There is a possibility that this dog, chained on the front porch, was used for guarding purposes.  Regardless, a dog left chained and unsupervised -- especially one that may have had access to the sidewalk  and has a bite history-- is a recipe for a disaster.

My heart goes out to the Cantrell family.

This story has been picked up by only 2 news sources thus far.

 

 

Weekly Roundup - -Week ending Easter, 2011

 A lot of interesting news stories, some evidence of a postive trend, and of course, some great blog postings this week.  I know today is a holiday, but I hope everyone is planning a quiet evening at home and can take the time to click through some of the links.

Enjoy.

 Cities/states and laws

There is a positive trend going on -- and it is very clear in this week's laws section. The majority of cities that begin discussing breed-specific regulations are by-and-large opting for behavior-based ordinances and more and more cities that have old breed-specific laws are starting to look at repeals. 

New Bedford, CT is discussing the possibility of breed-specific regulations. The same commissioner proposed a similar law last year and it died in committee because there was no support for it on the council.  It is unknown at this point if this bill will suffer the same fate.

Port Moody, BC has decided against breed-specific legislation -- meanwhile, nearby Coquitlam has breed-specific provisions but is considering repealing those provisions, as is nearby Castlegar.

Lowell, MA is discussing potential breed-specific legislation.

Beatrice (NE) has decided against making their new dangerous dog ordinance breed-specific and are focusing on behaviors instead.

Garden City, MI is amending their dangerous dog law with a law that will not be breed-specific.

Fabians law has passed is Arizona -- which increases penalties for owners of dogs that attack other dogs.

Dog bites/Attacks

Serious dog bites are rare - and when they occur, a wide variety of different types of dogs are involved. This is why we must focus on the circumstances behind attacks, and not breeds, in order to help prevent them.

A postal worker in Catawba, SC was attacked as she was delivering a package to a home. The home had a signs indicating that there were aggressive dogs on the premises (indicating that they may have been owned for the purpose of guarding) and the 5 mixed breed dogs attacked the worker.

A 1 year old Jacksonville, FL child was attacked by the family's dog. The dog is described as a "Border Collie-Chow mix" but the photo looks more like a Golden Retriever.

A 7 year old New Zealand child was viciously attacked by a neighbor's Bull Mastiff.

A 10 year old Des Moines girl was attacked by a "mixed breed dog".

An 8 year old St. Paul, MN boy was attacked by a Presa Canario.

An 11 year old Chicago area boy was bitten by a friend's mixed breed dog when he was coming over for a sleepover. The dog was described as a "Chow/Labrador/Shepherd mix" -- which seems to me like they're just guessing.

A 6 year old New Jersey girl was bitten by a German Shepherd that acts as a service dog for a 9 year old girl battle brain cancer.

A Lake Wailes, FL woman was attacked by two "mixed breed pit bulls' that were roaming at large while she was walking her own dogs.

A 56 year old Sullivan, OH man died after being bitten while trying to break up a spat between two dogs in his back yard. The man suffered from high blood pressure and high colesterol and had a massive heart attack following the incident -- even though a lot has been made by the media trying to blame the dogs for the incident.

A Shih Tzu bit off the tip of the nose of a worker at Home Depot.

Missouri's Prop B

Some follow-up information after Governor Nixon's compromise plan for replacing Prop B in Missouri:

Fulton Sun - gives their opinion

Two rallies were held at the same time in Jefferson City -- one in support of the changes, one opposing the changes and demanding to keep Prop B in tact. The rally supporting the compromise bill had several hundred attendees, whereas the "keep Prop B" rally had about 100.  The keep Prop B folks were apparently chanting "No Compromise" even though this group was promoted by HSUS -- who's director Wayne Pacelle noted this week that they supported compromise.

Governor Nixon's "Missouri Solution" is a bad Prop B -- Best Friends, I don't agree with their stance on this, but hey, in the interest of giving the other side. Nothing in their post is technically wrong, but they do fail to acknowledge that Nixon's solution brings with it the promise for more enforcement funding which is sorely needed in this state and a major part of the agreement. If you only focus on what you lost during a "compromise" and not what you gain, it will, of course seem like an unfair compromise.

Miscellaneous

The Animal Legal Defense Fund, along with four residents, filed a lawsuit against the Palm Springs Animal Shelter for calling itself a "no kill shelter" even though they killed 38% of the dogs that entered their shelter last year and 68% of the cats they impounded last year.

Camden, NJ police are investigating an incident in which an 8 month old 'pit bull' puppy got loose from a home and ran toward police officers. At no point has anyone interviewed said the dog was acting agressively, only that it was running toward people -- as dogs are inclined to do. The police officers, uh, panicked, and fired 33 rounds (that is not a typo) striking 3 cars and a house before finally killing the non-aggressive puppy. Breed hysteria can be very dangerous when officers start spraying bullets around a neighborhood over non-aggressive dogs.

Blogs you should read

A rescuers guide to creating awesome web videos -- Saving Pets, as always, has some awesome advice on doing a better job of promoting adoptable pets -- this time through the use of video.  She has also included several awesome examples of how to show off the animals' personalities through video.

The battle for the lives of Victoria's pets -- Saving Pets asks how shelters can still champion killing in the face of alternatives.  The answer - -to paint the alternative as even darker.

Mythbusters: If dog breeders stopped breeding all our problems would be solved -- Wisconsin Watchdog continues here "mythbusters" series by discussing the common myth that we will solve out shelter killing problem if we end breeding. Indiscriminate breeding - yes. But breeding as a whole, no. This is a good, well-thought-out blog posting.

Mythbusters: Volunteers are more trouble than they're worth -- more Mythbusters from Wisconsin Watchdog, this time highlighting the importance of volunteers in improving the situation for shelter animals.

Defending the indefensible - Wisconsin Watchdog looks at the mental process for how shelter workers end up defending indefensible practices at their shelters.

Can you feel death in the air? -- Pound Dogs looks at troubling video from the Montreal Animal Shelter (provided by Berger Blanc) and takes a look at the business of killing dogs -- as funded by the Montreal taxpayers, and apparently enjoyed by some of the workers at Berger Blanc.

Earlier this week in Kansas City, 2 dogs were found dumped in a dumpster after being brutally killed. PawPrints the Magazine has some good pictures from the memorial event held at the site.

Too often, people look at all acts of aggression by a dog as the same -- but Canine Aggression Issues with Jim Crosby is taking a look at different types of aggression.  Part 2: Resource Aggression. Part 3: Social Aggression. Both are well worth your time.

Where are real people supposed to get dogs?  - Save a Pit Bull Save the World takes a look at a friend of hers that wants to adopt a new dog but was denied by rescue...leaving her with few options.  This is a story that is FAR too common.

Why you should fight BSL (and encouragement for the battle) -- Jodi Pries at Bless the Bullies has an awesome piece about the turning tide and why people must join (or continue) the fight.

Where are all these fake service dogs -- For the pit bulls asks a logical question following all of the hysteria about people having fake service dogs following a recent ADA ruling

Houston SPCA's plan to kill 50 "rescued" Rottweilers -- from Houston No Kill Examiner

The Evolution of a Bad Rap -- Stubby Dog takes a look at how 'pit bulls' have developed their reputation.

And Finally, I want to give a HUGE tip of the hat to Shirley at YesBiscuit!. Shirley has been doing an amazing job of covering the ongoing slaughter in Memphis. I plan to do a separate writeup on this this week, but please go check out all of Shirley's stuff on the topic, because she has been doing an amazing job of showing how animal advocates can keep an eye on shelters and force improvements for animals in those shelters.

Compassion saves lives vs "catch and kill" philosphies

Yesterday, Lucas County (OH) Dog Warden Julie Lyle announced that the county had received a $38,400 grant from PetSmart Charities to help them partner with Humane Ohio and offer very low cost spay/neuter services for pit bull type dogs. With the  "Fix-a-bull" program, up to 500 dogs can be altered for $5 and be microchiped so dogs can more easily be returned to their owners.

The program is in response to continuingly large numbers of 'pit bull type' dogs making their way into the shelter in Lucas County and the shelter's commitment to lowering kill rates. Lyle estimates that about 40% of the dogs taken in by the dog warden's office are 'pit bulls' or 'pit bull mixes' -- and only 11% are returned to their owners.

Lyle was hired last spring after taking over for long-time dog warden Tom Skeldon - who resigned amid public pressure due to the shelter's poor performance.

Lyle has continually worked to make improvements in Toledo, first by helping get the shelter policy changed to allow pit bull type dogs to not have to be killed at the shelter, and then removing the city's breed-specific law.

Lyle's changes have increased the number of dogs saved at the Lucas County Shelter.

In 2010, 1,544 dogs were killed at the city pound -- down 21% from the 1,951 killed in 2009 and 38% from the 2,483 killed in 2008  - Skeldon's last complete year as Dog Warden (some programs put in place in late 2009 afer Skeldon resigned and because of public pressure helped increase adoptions at the very end of 2009).

Much of the credit goes to improved relations with the Toledo Area Humane Society which accepted more than twice the number of transfers in 2010 as they did in 2009.

Lyle continues to make improvements to the old-school catch and kill philosophy of her predecesor -- and the dogs are becoming much better off because of it. There is a lot of work to be done, and rebuilding relationships with owners of 'pit bull' type dogs will take awhile after years of being targeted by Skeldon and even having a financial incentive for Skeldon to confiscate and kill their dogs.

But working with the rescues in the community, making a good effort to be compassionate, and working WITH 'pit bull' owners instead of against them, are all great steps toward a better community for animals in Toledo.

Two very different views of the Missouri Compromise

Earlier today, I mentioned that two Misouri Animal Welfare Groups; Humane Society of Missouri and Missouri Alliance for Animal Legislation (MAAL) sat down with the head of the state Department of Ag, and two organizations representing the breeding community, and the Governor, to create a compromise solution to the debate over Proposition B. It's a solid plan, that addresses several of the key issues facing dogs in commercial breeding operations in this state. 

The plan keeps several provisions that improve the treatment of dogs in commercial breeing operations. It keeps the funding for Operation Bark Alert -- which has shut down nearly 500 commercial breeders in the past 2 years. It provides funding for nearly double the enforcement resources in the state for next year - which was identified by the state auditor, Better Business Bureau and the USDA as being a primary driver for the state's current 'puppy mill' problem. It also gives the state attorney general more power to  close down unlicensed and poorly run commercial breeding operations.

In this post, I'm going to provide two different points of view on this. The first is from Bob Baker, the Executive Director of MAAL.  MAAL is an animal welfare organization that has pushed for a lot of law concerning the welfare of animals in the state - including this list, as well as pushing for the passing of Prop B. This is a group that is very much on the fringe of animal rights and is more in line with HSUS's views than not in many cases. 

Here is Bob Baker's comments regarding the compromise. All emphasis is Mr. Baker's:

Today we have announced our support of proposed legislation that would provide humane standards of care to dogs in commercial breeding facilities and would implement the core provisions of Prop B.

This proposed legislation would not have come about without your tireless efforts over the past few months. Your personal visits, letters, emails and phone calls to your legislators as well as Governor Nixon are making a difference.

As you already know current law and SB 113 would allow breeding dogs to be confined to tiny wire floor cages for their entire lives - many warehoused inside barns never seeing the light of day much less exercise. Current law and SB 113 deny veterinary care and even an annual veterinary exam to the dogs and would allow frozen water to satisfy requirements for water.

The forthcoming legislation would require an annual veterinarian examination of breeding dogs to ensure their health and welfare as well as require that any dogs with a serious illness or injury receive prompt treatment by a veterinarian. This legislation would also require continuous access to clean water and thus dogs would no longer be forced to languish without water for hours and hours in the summer heat or allow frozen water to satisfy water requirements in the winter.

More important, this legislation will provide ample space for the dogs confined in these breeding facilities as it mandates that dogs are provided with three times the current requirement of space.

This legislation also mandates that breeding dogs have constant and unfettered access to an outdoor exercise run - breeding dogs will now be guaranteed exercise and fresh air.

This legislation will also prohibit wire flooring which is uncomfortable for dogs to walk on and often causes injuries to their legs and feet.

Along with increased standards of care, this legislation will provide for a dramatic increase in enforcement efforts by providing funding for additional inspectors and veterinarians to help ensure the humane treatment of dogs in commercial breeding operations.

Thanks again for all your hard work and perseverance. Your efforts are paying off. We will be asking you to contact your legislators again once this legislation is formally introduced and will continue to keep you informed as this legislation progresses.

 However, HSUS felt VERY differently about the compromise bill.  

Here is Wayne Pacelle's (or his Ghost Writer's) comments regarding the exact same legislation. Emphasis mine (along with a few comments in italics):

With some fanfare, a “compromise” in Missouri was announced between some traditional political adversaries on Prop B yesterday. Since the November election, the coalition of animal protection organizations (including MAAL) that pushed for the passage of this anti-puppy mill measure wanted to see the will of the people respected. But knowing the composition of the state legislature, and the hostility of the Republican leadership in both chambers to Prop B, we knew that we’d have to entertain compromise on some elements of the agreement (at no point, ever, publically, has Pacelle or anyone from HSUS mentioned any thought of compromise -- and likely, this is why they didn't have a seat at the table when it came to this new law), in order to protect the measure for the long term and to obviate the need for a second public vote on the issue.

The opponents of Prop B didn’t want to compromise on its core elements (in fairness, the opponents WERE at the table for the compromise -- even though, realistically, they are in the situation of power at this point), and they charged ahead with a bill to repeal it (SB 113,which passed both chambers).

Yesterday the situation turned fairly dramatically, with an announcement that two respected Missouri animal welfare groups (Including MAAL) had reached an accord with the trade associations for the puppy mill industry and the agriculture industry. The HSUS, the ASPCA, and Best Friends Animal Society don’t believe that the arrangement reached yesterday adequately protects Prop B.

A compromise, in this context, would have entailed some movement from both sides but ensured that Prop B remains largely intact. But this deal does fundamental damage to Prop B:

• Prop B established a limit on the number of breeding dogs at 50, and that provision is gone. There’s not even a requirement that if you have 500 or 1,000 dogs you have to have enough staff on hand to care for the dogs. 
• Prop B called for breeding females to have a rest every third heat cycle. The new measure allows dogs to be bred every heat cycle for their entire lives.
• Prop B required an outdoor exercise area at least twice the size of a dog's indoor enclosure, so that dogs would not spend their whole life crammed in cages. This new measure requires an "outdoor run" but does not mandate any particular size, and allows the state Department of Agriculture to waive this vague mandate in regulations.
• Prop B required veterinary care for illness or injury, but the new measure allows such care to be withheld anytime a breeder decides on his or her own that a condition is not "serious."
• Prop B called for no stacking of cages, but the new measure allows it, as long as there is an impervious barrier between the cages. Cage stacking is a recipe for the type of overcrowding that defines the worst puppy mills. (It should be noted here that a LARGE number of rescue and shelter orgs stack cages in this regard -- with no outrage)
• Prop B stipulated no wire flooring, but the new provision allows for wire flooring as long as it’s encased. Coated wire flooring still harms dogs' paws and is unacceptable.

The new language weakens the space requirements in Prop B, and it’s extremely vague and unclear. What’s more, breeders will have five years to come into compliance with it, and that’s inordinately long in this context (this isn't actually true in most cases)

We strongly support more robust funding for enforcement of commercial dog breeding operations, as the governor proposed last week.  But there’s no reason to calve off large portions of Prop B in order to have adequate enforcement (So Wayne isn't willing to give up anything to get what actually is the single biggest win out of the whole conversation, better enforcement). It’s a false choice, and it smacks of political extortion: agree to these changes, or we’ll defund enforcement.

HSUS believes that compromise is an important part of the political process (apparently, as long as it is the other party doing all of the compromising). All along, we’ve been open to real compromise. But we insist on getting something meaningful in the process for animals, and we also believe in respecting the free and fair election on this subject that occurred less than six months ago. Missouri voters heard from both sides, read the clear ballot language about the provisions of Prop B, and made their judgment. In this case, this compromise falls far short of Prop B in protecting breeding dogs from unnecessary suffering, and it’s not worthy of support.

So why such different views of the same proposal? Who do you think is more "right"?

Is MAAL just caving under a situation where they realize they are not in the position of power in the state legislature and just preserving what they can?  Or do they see the increased enforcement as the key that is worth losing other elements of Prop B?  Is HSUS grandstanding? Or are they right?  

Local orgs support "Missouri Compromise" -- National Orgs, not so much (#MoPropB)

Yesterday, Missouri Gov. Jay Nixon issued a statement about an agreement between the state's animal welfare and agriculturual organizations:

"Over the past week, my administration has been working closely with folks on every side of this issue to reach an agreement that respects the will of the voters, protects dogs and allows responsible breeders to earn a living in our state. People with good minds and good will have come together to develop a Missouri solution to this Missouri issue, and together, we have made significant progress. Throughout this process, I have met personally with representatives of Missouri's major animal-welfare and agricultural organizations, and with leaders on this issue in both the House and the Senate. The agreement that was signed today upholds the intent of the voters, protects dogs and ensures that Missouri agriculture will continue to grow."

The agreement is essentially SB 113/HB 131 -- with a provision that requires the twice the kennel space as the current law and unfettered access to an attached outdoor run.  Kennel sizes will have to triple in size by 2016 -- or for any newly constructed facilities. Also, wire strand flooring will be prohibited.

I am also assuming that Gov. Nixon's proposal for an incremental $1.1 million in funding for additional enforcement resources is a part of the agreement.

The agreement was signed by Kathy Warnick, Humane Society of Missouri; Karen Strange of Missouri Federation of Animal Owners; Bob Baker, of MAAL (a large animal welfare lobby organization -- which, incidentally, still has info on their website to call Gov. Nixon to veto SB 113); Barbara York of the Missouri Pet Breeders Association and John Hagler* of the Missouri Department of Ag.

*BTW, I've been hearing a lot of great things about Hagler from people in Jeff City. Hagler was appointed by Jay Nixon as the head of the department of ag in 2009 -- and immediately set up Operation Bark Alert -- which has shut down nearly 500 poorly run or unlicensed commercial breeders in the past 2 years. Folks say he is serious about getting our inadequate breeders out of business and think he will be successful at doing so -- but not at the expense of those who are running respectible operations.

While these groups were all meeting to come up with a compromise solution (that I think looks pretty solid and is an improvement to the current SB 113/HB131), HSUS was organizing a rally to save Prop B (the ASPCA is pushing the rally also)- - the email I got from them yesterday is posted on the left. It seems obvious at this point that HSUS is more focused on "winning" with Prop B than coming up with a workable solution.

I applaud the large organizations in the state for coming together for a compromise solution and breaking away from HSUS on this. I've been saying from the start that getting both sides in a room to talk is the most important thing to coming up with a workable solution and that compromise was going to have to be a part of this process.  I am hopeful that we'll be able to move on and continue with the success we've had over the past 2 years in closing down substandard breeding operations.

I honestly am not sure what next steps are for this proposal -- whether it has to be kicked back to the House and Senate, or added on later. I'm trying to figure that part out. 

H/T to Fired Up Missouri for posting both the signed agreement and the proposed legislation text.

Here's an announcement from MAAL.

Weekly Roundup -- Week ending 4/17/11

Obviously I'm behind on this week's roundup - -and there is a LOT of interesting stuff to cover -- so I'm going to dive right in.  And because I missed last week's roundup I'm going to pick up some interesting stuff from two weeks ago also.  I'm particularly far behind on catching up on some of the blogs out there -- so many of those will fall to next week's roundup.

Cities/States and Laws

Manton, MI is appears to be considering potentially breed-specific legislation.

Nevada AB 324 is a newly introduced bill that would prohibit breed-specific laws in the state. Fourteen states have similar laws.

The city of Hopkiinton, IA recently discussed adding Rottweilers to the list of banned breeds in the city (which already bans 'pit bulls') after a 3 year old girl was killed by a Rottweiler last month. The city (wisely) chose not to ban Rottweilers, but the city continues to be an example of how knee-jerk legislation can get passed and how ineffective banning one type of dog is.

Daytona Beach, FL appears set to pass a law requiring all pets to be spayed or neutered -- in spite of the fact that such laws have failed virtually everywhere.

Patterson, LA has passed a new ordinance restricting the ownership of "pit bulls".

A Minnesota Bill would target people who photograph or videotape "animal facilities" -- targeting undercover photography or video taken of "factory farms" or "puppy mills".

Talks of mandating spay/neuter in Ft. Smith, AR have fortunately stalled.

An editorial that is critical of Castlegar, BC's breed-specific ordinance could hopefully push that community to repeal their breed ban.

Rhode Island is now discussing the Companion Animal Protection Act.

Xenia, OH is looking at a law that would ban all 'pit bulls' from the community and contains no grandfather clause.

Dog Bites/Attacks

Serious dog attacks are very rare when compared to the 78 million owned dogs in this country.  But when they occur, a wide variety of different types of dogs are involved, which is why the circumstances surrounding these attacks is far more important than the type of dog involved.

A 2 year old Las Vegas boy was attacked by a 'pit bull' type dog that had apparently been involved in an attack 2 weeks prior. There is little info on the cause of the more recent attack, but the first one occurred as the owner was attempting to walk his dog off-leash and it wasn't voice responsive.

A Patton Township (PA) boy sustained what are described as "serious injuries" after being attacked by a Labrador Retriever.

A Boxer in Rome, GA apparently attacked four people after the dog contracted rabies.  The dog bit the four people and then went off into the woods and died. Rabies cases in dogs in the the US (it's been like 30 years since someone has died of rabies contracted from a dog in the US) are extremely rare -- but this is a good reminder to people to always vaccinate your dog regularly.

A 7 year old Woodburn, OR girl was attacked by a 'pit bull"/Lab mix that was chained up in the yard where the girl was playing and the girl was running and tripped over the chain, which yanked the dog, which caused the dog to bite the girl.

A 10 year old Akron, IA girl was attacked by two 'pit bulls'.  The girl was staying in the family's home and was playing in the back yard where the dogs were. No one witnessed the attack to know what may have started it.

A 75 year old Sharon Hill, PA woman was bitten in the face by the neigbhor's German Shepherd. Authorities say they believe the dog may have gotten its collar caught on fence between the two homes and the woman tried to help out the dog. Dogs can often bite when they are injured or scared -- as may have been the case in this situation.

A three year old Ontario (CA) girl was severely attacked by the family's bull mastiff/border collie mix that she was playing with in the yard, alone, while it was chained. Ontario has a ban on particular breeds of dogs -- which has done nothing to educate owners on responsible ownership practices and not decreased dog bites in the provence.

A 2 year old Ft. Smith, AR girl faces rabies shots after being bitten in the face by her uncle's Rat Terrier. The uncle shot the dog and buried it in the yard -- and didn't have any vaccination records for the dog. 

A seven year old, Miami-Dade boy suffered severe wounds when a "German Shepherd type" dog as he was trying to protect his 4 year old brother and his brother's friend from being attacked by the dog that escaped from its backyard. Miami Dade has a costly and ineffective breed ban that continues to not protect the public from aggressive dogs.

A West Harrison, IN man was saved by two strangers that came to his aid as he was being attacked by two Boxers.

A Naples, FL toddler was bitten in the back seat of their car by the family's Black Mouth Cur.

Miscellaneous

Maybe the worst animal product ever.

A New Orleans area man was arrested after hitting his 'pit bull' our times with a baseball bat and stabbing the dog with a 4 foot sword.

A great article from The City Wire in Ft. Smith, AR that talks about better solutions than Mandatory Spay/Neuter laws.

The Cabarrus County, NC animal shelter's kill rate has dropped from 80% to about 50% by putting mor emphasis on adoptions wit a partnership with the local Humane Society.  

Pit Bulls as therapy dogs -- a great article from the Oak Hill Gazette

Dogs are better than exercise equipment -- the New York Times article discusses that dog owners are more likely to get exercise than people who don't own dogs. The bad side though is that 9% of dog owners say they don't walk their dogs because their dogs are too ill-behaved to take on walks. Yikes.

Blogs worth reading

Dispelling "Pit Bull" Urban Mythology -- No Pit Bull Bans tackles some urban legends that strangely still exist.

After Mike Vick served his prison term for his involvement in a dog fighting ring, HSUS's CEO Wayne Pacelle embraced him and took him out on speaking engagements in the city of Philadelphia. While Vick has excelled on the field, his popularity seems to have increased dog fighting activity in the city -- Steve Dale has his thoughts after yet another dog fighting bust in Philadelphia.

A Canadian Cure for Homeless Pets -- No More Homeless Pets' Blog takes a look at Calgary's animal control model and its success in getting animals from the shelter back home. It's amazing that in spite of all of Calgary's success that more cities haven't embraced their service-oriented structure instead of being punishment based.

Playing Hide and seek with overhead costs -- and interesting read from Humanewatch

No mention of breed in article on AKC German Shepherd Dog Attack -- For the Pit Bulls takes another look at breed bias in the media.

Shelters Doing Good -- For the Pit Bulls has one of my favorite features on her blog of shelters that are doing better.

Hypocrisy of "The Bond" - Time4Dogs takes a look at Wayne Pacelle's new book

How to become a superhero (or...why I would never donate to a major charity) -- Freakanomics takes a look at why donating to a "microcharity" is superior to giving to a major national one.  I think this is very applicable to the animal welfare world.

New Hampshire: A leading light for no kill -- Best Friends details Peter Marsh's case study in New Hampshire for targeted, low cost spay/neuter vs mandatory laws.