My Photo


follow us in feedly

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Best Of KC Dog Blog

Become a Fan

« Florida man dies after dog attack | Main | Dog bites girl, Man beats dog »

June 16, 2011



I have to wonder how many forests we could save by enforcing current laws instead of passing new ones. But then the lawmakers and lobbyists need something to posture about.


My husband went to Pacelle's book signing in Kansas City tonight. He's in the shower right now, LOL. Someone actually complained to Pacelle that at one of the parties where they celebrated Prop B passing, they were serving MEAT. Wow, and we were repeatedly told Prop B was "just about dogs".


Wow, the hubby must have drawn the short straw. What was the attendence like? I haven't heard much buzz about this....I was kind of hoping no one would show up.


Hubby indeed drew the short straw! I went to the neighbor's house for a Tastefully Simple party. About halfway through the party one of the neighbors said my husband had just walked in and commented that he was brave walking into a party full of women. I said heck, he's just looking for free food and booze, and I was sure he could use some booze since he'd been hanging out with a less friendly crowd of women - and not nearly as good looking! :-)

About 35 people attended Wayne's book signing at Barnes and Noble on The Plaza, so in a Metro area of 1.5 million people or so, 35 people is "zero", statistically speaking. Barb Schmitz, Missouri's Director for the HSUS, was there and she and Wayne hugged and said, "Oh, it's so good to see you again". AS IF she wasn't at his book signing in St. Louis yesterday. Give me a break.

Hubby said Babs (that's what we call her, since there is a MoFed board member named Barb) looked at him and probably "made" him. Well, no kidding. (1) I'm sure she's seen him at the Capitol (2) he's male (3) he's old and has silver hair. That is way outside the typical animal rights profile of white little missies between the ages of 18 and 35 that come from upper-middle class and wealthy backgrounds. However, that demographic is aging and I'm increasingly seeing older women (as in my age) at AR events - and they are NOT aging well. Must be the lack of meat.


If I would have known Russ was going I would have met him there - I had my box of rotten tomatoes ready to go!

Dianne Rhodes

Don't knock it til you've tried it. I'm reading The Bond and it's actually quite good. My major disappointment is that as an animal lover, I'm already aware of many of the "stories" in the first chapters. BTW, the week after the book signing in DC, the book was in the top ten sold in DC.


Dianne -- I'm not sure Best Seller lists are a good indication of much. Heck Snooki from the Jersey Shore had a NY Times Best Seller for a couple of weeks.

I honestly wouldn't mind reading the book - although I refuse to pay for it. I just have a lot of issues with someone who doesn't own a pet (and doesn't even seem to like them necessarily) talking about the bond humans have with animals...

I admit that I don't think HSUS is always wrong....but Pacelle continuing to rant about Prop B and to still criticize even though the state has gone through some pretty great pains to create the necessary funding for this really gets under my skin...and continues to reconfirm for me that he was more interested in "winning" than solving the problem.


Brent wrote, "I admit that I don't think HSUS is always wrong..."

Yea. And Hitler made the trains run on time. ;-)

MichelleD - Russ made a last-minute decision to attend. He asked if he should buy a book (I rolled my eyes!). I told him sure, and while you're at it send a couple of grand to the ASPCA!

Anyway, speaking of HSUS, there was a completely bizarre editorial in The Examiner this morning (The Examiner is an eastern Jackson County rag). They have repeatedly supported Prop B and most AR related platforms, although I know one of the editors personally and she has published a couple of things we've written, probably to shut me up and get me off her back. I don't need to state it's full of inaccuracies but it's rather bizarre! Go to this link and tell me what you think:


I have no idea why it's so hard for some of these folks to get that the wire cages with the dogs on top crapping on the ones below was addressed -- or to realize that many of our best shelters stack kennels in order to maximize the use of space. I also am tired of the "will of the voters" rhetoric. Everyone has known all along that this is the process -- and I know a fair number of people personally who voted for Prop B hoping it would get changed into something like it is now. It's not like voters had multiple options to choose from on the ballot and chose this one. They chose to make things better...and I think the government did that.


The article reads as follows:

"The governor also signed a bill passed this spring that requires that dogs at breeding operations be fed twice a day, have constant access to water, be examined by a vet at least once a year and, starting next January, have more space".

Okay, other than the increase in space issue, all of those other things were already in the Dept. of Ag. regs! Details. And, from what I've heard, the space requirements were going to increase in the regs with or without Prop B.

Then there's this in the article:

"Still, the voters opted for more. Last November they passed rules that included not just constant access to water and regular vet visits but also an end to wire-floored cages stacked one on top of another. Yes, that means feces and other stuff falls down in onto the dogs below and into their water. The voters also ordered that dogs have access to space in which to exercise, that they get some protection from extreme heat and cold, and that they be given breaks between breeding cycles".

The stacking cages without an impervious layer between the cages was - again - already not allowed! The bare wire floors - also already not allowed. Some breeders used the heavy-gage vinyl coated wire, which will be phased out. But those things were already in the Dept. of Ag. ACFA regs! the whole thing about dogs pooping and peeing on each other is pretty much a creation of the AR propaganda machine. I'm not saying it never happened, but it was ALREADY AGAINST THE ACFA REGS in Missouri.

When we finally threw up our hands and said, "Okay, we'll go along with no stacked cages, but NOBODY can stack cages, and that means shelters as well", the shelters all whined that they couldn't afford to redo their cages. Of course. So now the "impervious layer between cages" is actually in the statute. that was part of the compromise bill. The move toward different types of flooring was also coming down the pike, with or without Prop B. Many of the breeders are already in compliance with the new cage size and flooring.

The dogs already had protection from disease, heat, cold, and predators, but the "unfettered access to the outdoors" was going to change all that if Prop B had stood.

We continue - there's this:

"The General Assembly chose to ignore this festering problem for years, so the HUMANE SOCIETY OF THE UNITED STATES (emphasis mine) took it directly to the voters through the initiative process. That’s a blunt instrument of governance, with lots of unintended consequences (kmk's comment - yea, dead dogs are a BIG unintended consequence), but once the voters have spoken, the results need to be respected. What the governor and legislators are doing is rushing in where they should tread lightly".

the HSUS took it to the voters. Hmmm...gosh, I wonder if it's just mere coincidence that Wayne was in town yesterday for his book signing and here we are, the next morning, giving HSUS credit. And "the governor and legislators are rushing in..."...WTH????? Rushing in? They spent seven months working on this and crafting something to which everyone could agree - how is this "rushing in?".

And yea, I'm sick of the will of the people as well. the legislators have been tinkering with Prop C since 2008 and it passed by 66%, and no one is griping about that. Some of the same legislators that postured about "the will of the people" during Prop B debate got called on the carpet for voting to change Prop C, LOL.

It ends with this ridiculous comment - "Meanwhile, dogs suffer. Will things get better? Probably. Will the state get to the conditions that voters thought they were mandating? That will take more than compromise and rhetoric. We’ll see".

Okay, dogs are still suffering, and it's going to take more compromise and rhetoric? Rhetoric kills dogs - it doesn't end suffering. I'm not even sure I know what that means, unless they're referring to the rulemaking process, but SB161 is pretty clear. Perhaps we should just kill them all (the dogs) and end their suffering because clearly NOTHING is going to make these folks happy.

We don't need to worry about newspapers. They're slowly putting themselves out of existence by catering to people that don't read the paper.

The comments to this entry are closed.