Dog Owners' Oprah Alert

denise m

You say "animal rights activist" like it is a dirty word. You should remember that although there are extremists in any 'cause' and animal rights is no exception. I believe Oprah is active in animals rights and she probably is proud of the fact. That does not mean she advocates abolishing pet ownership. Although I personally don't think she is a hypocrite for owning the dogs she does (I will bet she would not do that now), I will agree that an argument could be made. 

     By it's very nature, the animal rights movement is extremest. The goal of groups such as PETA are to end the right for people to own pets ... they feel pet ownership is akin to slavery, eating meat and raising animals for slaughter is akin to the holocaust (remember Chicken Run - that wasn't just an innocent kids movie). They encourace children to drink beer in lieu of milk (GOT BEER? campaign), they once harassed mothers wearing fur coats in front of their children, calling the women murderers for wearing fur ... I could go on. Animal rights is NOT animal welfare, which is true concern for the well being of animals. AR's want animals to be equal to humans in all regards and be afforded the same basic rights as people.

denise m

I believe you are a breeder. Right? So I will defer to your opinions on the attack being launch on breeders. I support good dog breeders. Could you give me some examples of some of the "anti breeder" laws you are referring to?

     Right now, there is probably the single worst anti breeder legislation (outside of PAWS) disguised as anti puppy mill laws being proposed as we speak. These bills DO affect all breeders, from show to hobby to BYBs to commercial - which is why I choose to stand by everyone's right to breed. Along with those mandatory s/n legislation, this new proposition claims to be a way to weed out puppy mills when in fact it will effectively erradicate breeding altogether in the state of NJ. There are MANY others like it (a few of the latest can be seen here http://www.akc.org/news/index.cfm ;), this is the worst one I've seen though.

http://www.akc.org/news/index.cfm?article_id=3411

Reintroduced New Jersey Bill Bad News For Breeders

[Friday, January 18, 2008]

Assemblyman Neil Cohen and Assemblywoman Joan Voss have introduced Assembly Bill 1591, a bill which threatens the rights of responsible breeders in New Jersey.  This bill is a reintroduction of 2006’s AB 3401.  Fanciers, concerned dog owners, and responsible breeders should immediately contact their representatives in the New Jersey State Legislature, and the members of the Assembly Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee who will first hear this bill, and express their vehement opposition to this bill.  The bill defines a “breeder“ as any person who sells or offers to sell more than five puppies per year.  In addition to this incredibly low threshold, the bill requires breeders to comply with a host of restrictive regulations and institutes steep fines for violations.  AB 1591 also prohibits any breeder from selling more than 25 dogs in one year.  The American Kennel Club vehemently opposes AB 1591’s attempt to effectively outlaw breeding in New Jersey.  Responsible breeders give the individual care and human contact that each puppy needs in order to grow into a healthy, well-adjusted companion and neighbor.  Forcing responsible breeders out of business would deprive citizens of a most valuable resource when purchasing a pet.  The American Kennel Club believes that breeding programs should be undertaken responsibly for the purpose of preserving breed characteristics and producing healthy, well-socialized puppies.  Responsible breeders are expected to give careful consideration to health issues, temperament, and genetic screening, as well as to the individual care and placement of puppies in responsible homes.  AKC supports and promotes these and other responsible breeding practices through breeders’ education programs, and commends those who offer similar guidance.  The American Kennel Club opposes the concept of breeding permits, breeding bans, or the mandatory spay/neuter of purebred dogs.  Instead, we support reasonable and enforceable laws that protect the welfare and health of purebred dogs and do not restrict the rights of breeders and owners who take their responsibilities seriously.  AB 1591 goes far beyond encouraging responsible breeding.  Under AB 1591, all breeders would be required to comply with draconian regulations including maintaining specified temperatures, keeping animals only on nonporous surfaces, and circulating air at precise levels.  The measure further mandates the acceptable dimensions for crates and runs, and sets minimum socialization standards.  Finally, all breeders are required to register annually with the Department of Health.  This list will be published and made available to the public.  All breeders are required to furnish specified information to pet purchasers and provide a full refund for any reason for a pet returned within 14 days.  Any dog which is sold with a pedigree can be returned for a full refund within 26 months if any congenital or genetic defects are discovered.  Violations can be punished with monetary fines or suspension of the license to sell pets.  A first violation can result in a prohibition on selling cats or dogs for five years and subsequent offenses can add an additional five years for each violation.  Civil penalties may also be administered.  For a first offense, a breeder shall be fined $5,000 and for a second offense the breeder may be fined $10,000 for each subsequent offense.  A member of the public who supplies information that results in fines or suspension will be eligible for an award of 10 percent of the civil penalty or $250, whichever is greater.

 I'm sorry, but what conscientious breeder would sell a puppy to be kept in a box at a store? Pet stores are not good for puppies. Puppy mill or not, any breeder who knowingly sells a puppy to a pet store gets a big thumbs down from me.

I used to think I'd only ever rescue a dog. I have come to appreciate the advantages of purchasing a well bred dog. I own one. I see the reasons for rescue, and for buying an intentionally bred dog. What I don't see is the attitude from some breeders that dogs in shelters are somehow commodities that are worth less and wanted less. I can't speak for other areas, but I know in So Cal dogs with excellent temperaments and health are put down due to shelter overcrowding. Many of these dogs are dream dogs for the average owner. If no one wants them, perhaps its because they haven't been marketed as well as the "fancy" dogs.

I think PETA is a bunch of kooks, but if any one wants to put me in the general category of "for better rights for animals," I'll take that with pride. Dogs are living, breathing beings. Not designer, not a commodity, and not the new black.  

HoundMusic

     By it's very nature, the animal rights movement is extremest.

 

I just cannot agree with that. There are just so many people, including members of this forum, who actively support animal rights and are anything but extremists. You can draw attention to all the crazy statements that come from PETA in an effort to paint everyone with the same brush, but it doesn't make it so. There are millions of individuals who work tirelessly in an effort to halt the unethical treatment of animals, educate and promote responsible pet ownership and at the end of the day make hopefully make the life of animals better. If you want to label them all extremists go ahead, but I think you do them and many members here a disservice.  

 "These bills DO affect all breeders, from show to hobby to BYBs to commercial - which is why I choose to stand by everyone's right to breed."

I don't know what to say.Do you support this?

 "> 

 

this is the worst one I've seen though. 

- bill defines a “breeder“ as any person who sells or offers to sell more than five puppies per year.  -  bill requires breeders to comply with a host of restrictive regulations and institutes steep fines for violations.  - prohibits any breeder from selling more than 25 dogs in one year.  - all breeders would be required to maintaining specified temperatures, - keeping animals only on nonporous surfaces - circulating air at precise levels.  - acceptable dimensions for crates and runs - sets minimum socialization standards.  - all breeders are required to register annually with the Department of Health.  This list will be published and made available to the public.  - breeders are required to furnish specified information to pet purchasers and provide a full refund for any reason for a pet returned within 14 days.  Any dog which is sold with a pedigree can be returned for a full refund within 26 months if any congenital or genetic defects are discovered.    With all due respect, if this is the worst you've seen I fail to see the threat you elude to. I think it is important to have standards and regulations in an industry that deals in living, feeling creatures. Can laws be too restrictive? Sure, but I don't see anything too extreme here. Unfortunately relying solely on "breeders' education programs" to ensure responsible breeding is not enough IMO. I am always a little worried about the possibility of abuse when it comes to self regulation.

In that first post the American Sporting Dog Alliance mentioned:-
"This month, Winfrey has been giving serious consideration to an invitation to appear in nude photographs sponsored by one of the most extreme animal rights groups in America, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, pop tabloids report."
 
Personally I cannot imagine Oprah Winfrey seriously considering to appear in nude photographs, and where I feel the American Sporting Dog Alliance is spreading speculations and rumours, not only in regards to this but also in some other things they mention even in other posts, where these to me undermines their credibility.
.

 

timsdat

“I would never, ever adopt another pet now without going to a shelter to do it. I am a changed woman after seeing this show,”

It kind of gives you and idea of where the segment is heading.

 

Not really. I have said that very same thing. My first two dogs were from a shelter and I thought I would never buy from a breeder, but I changed my mind after a good education and found that not all breeders are alike. And I know plenty of people who only rescue dogs and would never buy a dog, simply because there are so many dogs and so many who get put down. And these people aren't extremists who wish to stop all breeding. It's kind of like saying that she'll never eat beef again... I wouldn't read too much into it.

As regards the email snippet, sure there ARE extremists, but I would rather see it in context. It sounds like someone's opinions, to me... Some people draw a line between "good breeders" and "puppy mills". It's clear that some don't. But I don't believe that good breeders are going to be stopped. If you (generic) are following good breeding practices that have been mentioned, then you have nothing to worry about. If you're breeding like rabbits and keeping the puppies in stacked cages outside without proper care, and off-loading the ones you don't sell to a pet store... In other words if  "breeding program" is just words to you and not a real plan for bettering the standard of the breed, then you might have something to be concerned about.

Dog_ma

I think PETA is a bunch of kooks, but if any one wants to put me in the general category of "for better rights for animals," I'll take that with pride. Dogs are living, breathing beings. Not designer, not a commodity, and not the new black.  

 

Well-said! I agree 100% 

denise m

quote user="HoundMusic"]

     By it's very nature, the animal rights movement is extremest.

 

I just cannot agree with that. There are just so many people, including members of this forum, who actively support animal rights and are anything but extremists. You can draw attention to all the crazy statements that come from PETA in an effort to paint everyone with the same brush, but it doesn't make it so. There are millions of individuals who work tirelessly in an effort to halt the unethical treatment of animals, educate and promote responsible pet ownership and at the end of the day make hopefully make the life of animals better. If you want to label them all extremists go ahead, but I think you do them and many members here a disservice.  

[/quote]


     Then we agree to disagree. I do not believe animals have rights - I believe that as the species endowed with higher awareness, we have a responsibility to ensure their welfare, to prevent abuse & neglect, to responsibly care for our animals. Animal rights supporters believe humans should not own animals - their methods and philosophies are akin to terrorist orginizations such as ELF. Their methods are extreme - as are their views. In reality, these people want to afford animals rights because they do not believe that humans are any better than any other animal on this earth. Many people confuse the concern for animals as being an AR activist, when in fact, many of the ones who are truly doign it for animals and have a healthy view of the relationship between animals humans are actually animal welfare "activists", not AR. [quote user="denise m"]

denise m

"These bills DO affect all breeders, from show to hobby to BYBs to commercial - which is why I choose to stand by everyone's right to breed."

I don't know what to say.Do you support this?

     Yeah, I support true abuse & neglect of animals because a.) I don't believe animals have the same rights that are afforded a human and b.) I am against anti breeder legislation. Did you read the article? It's going to affect show breeders, it's going to affect someone who has one litter a year with the same impact as it would someone who breeds 10 litters. Pups would have to be in a climate controlled environment that must be at a specific temp or you face loosing your license. Fine for FIRST OFFENSE is $5000. That is going to put a hobby breeder out of business before it will a commercial breeder, btw. Do you honestly think I support abuse/neglectful situations because I am against anti breeder legislation? lol I love hearing people who've never bred a litter & probably don't even own an intact dog who believe they know more about animal husbandry than the breeder. If you don't see anythign extreme with a law that will essentially outlaw breeding than I believe you are an AR and will just respectfully disagree with your beliefs.

Again, we can speculate 'til the cows come home, but why not just wait and SEE what the show is about before we crucify the woman? I am among those who wrote and asked her to do a show on puppy mills. Let's give her a chance.

HoundMusic

Animal rights supporters believe humans should not own animals - their methods and philosophies are akin to terrorist orginizations such as ELF. Their methods are extreme - as are their views.

If you don't want others to paint you with the same broad brush then you shouldn't do it either. There are certainly fanatics in the animal rights movement but that doesn't mean we all are or even the majority of us. It raises my BP when I see such generalizations.

HoundMusic

Yeah, I support true abuse & neglect of animals because a.) I don't believe animals have the same rights that are afforded a human and b.) I am against anti breeder legislation.

Are you serious???

HI FOLKS!

Moderator here,

Let's try to remain civil and understand that rules apply...yes even in the Advocacy section. Lots of good points and discussion to be made and have been made. Let's not sully that with overtly dissmisive sarcasm and sniping, okay?

This applies AFTER this show airs as well...most especially.

Thanks.

Ok back on topic.

 I see from Oprah's press release here are the guests on the show. http://www.oprah.com/about/press/releases/200804/press_releases_20080402.jhtml

In a revealing hour, Wayne Pacelle, president and CEO of the Humane Society of the United States, and Bill Smith, head of Mainline Animal Rescue in Chester Springs, Pennsylvania, issue an urgent wake-up call to all pet owners about the prevalence of puppy mills.

Sure sounds like it is going to be a fair and balanced report.  I wonder where a representative is from the Pet Industry Association.

 

I just want to make clear the meaning of a couple terms (of which I was unaware).

Animal Rights: The concept of animal rights, also known as animal liberation, is the idea that the basic interests of non-human animals, such as the interest in avoiding suffering, should be afforded the same consideration as the basic interests of human beings. Although animal rights advocates approach the issue from different philosophical positions, they argue, broadly speaking, that animals should no longer be regarded as property, or used as food, clothing, research subjects, or entertainment, but should instead be regarded as legal persons and members of the moral community.

Animal Welfare: refers to the viewpoint that it is morally acceptable for human beings to use animals for food, in animal research, as clothing, and in entertainment, so long as unnecessary suffering is avoided. The animal welfare position is that there are no animal interests that cannot be overridden if the consequence of doing so is sufficiently beneficial to human beings. The position is contrasted with the animal rights position, which holds that animals should not be used by, or regarded as the property of, human beings.

According to this, I support animal welfare, but NOT animal rights. Because I do believe my animals are my "property" (although sentient), I do use animals for food and clothing and do not see them as "legal persons".

I'm not at all sure what Oprah's position is...  

I guess I'm not clear as to why the folks who produce pups solely to sell in pet stores should be represented?

FourIsCompany

According to this, I support animal welfare, but NOT animal rights. Because I do believe my animals are my "property" (although sentient), I do use animals for food and clothing and do not see them as "legal persons".

There are however many areas where welfare spills over to the rights arena when welfare is taken too far.  Some examples are euthanasia methods, pig farrowing crate usage, MSN, farming techniques including free range and battery caging, breeding restrictions, etc.  It's very easy to cross the line from welfare to rights.

 

glenmar

I guess I'm not clear as to why the folks who produce pups solely to sell in pet stores should be represented?

Gee I guess if you want to paint all producers of pups that get sold in pet stores as puppy millers you wouldn't need anyone from the other side.

 

Again, I have known an awful lot of breeders and not ONE would sell pups to a pet store. Truly reputable breeders don't breed without a reason, and that reason is rarely to pick up extra cash, if ever.