Written for a Lancaster PA
newspaper in response to an
editorial, published on the Dog
Legislation list, this article
was subsequently picked up by a
“commercial, hi- volume”
publication, and has since been
widely circulated. We present
the 2008 article due to the
excellent research, statistics,
and profit involved in imported
mutts. 2010 estimates for dogs
imported exceed $40,000,000,
thus the title:
SHELTER & RESCUE IMPORTS
Trafficking In Dogs - For a Fee
L.D.
Witouski ©
TheDogPlace
- February 2010 -
Recently, a letter was sent to
the Editor in a Lancaster,
Pennsylvania newspaper regarding
the dishonesty of rescue
organizations. The comment
section was
especially interesting since
many did not believe the facts
in the letter.
Since the Oprah show,
highlighting "puppy mills", many
people have questioned why the
State has not done anything
about the conditions that were
shown. It could be that there is
some type of arrangement between
those that "rescue" dogs that
are "no longer wanted or needed"
and the facilities shown on the
Oprah expose'. It was
interesting to note that in an
interview, the man that has been
hailed a hero, by some, for
bringing these dogs to Oprah's
attention, stated that he was
counting on the Amish that were
featured in the Oprah show - not
having televisions. Having made
such a comment tends to lead one
to believe that something is not
exactly as originally stated and
even more so questionable since
the Pa. Dog Law Bureau is having
a difficult time identifying
those "kennels". However, that
isn't the subject of this
article and I only mention it
because the Oprah show opened
other doors related to the
subject.
In reading the comments
regarding the LTE mentioned
above, the writer was asked to
prove her allegations. Many of
those that commented simply
refused to believe that dogs
were being imported into the
United States by rescue groups.
One particular individual asked
why this phenomena would occur
since there are, allegedly, so
many homeless dogs available in
shelters and rescues across the
country. Another person
commented that dogs had to sit
for 6-8 weeks before entering
U.S. soil. Rather than research
the subjects themselves, to see
just how duped they have been by
animal rights activists, they
accused the writer of
misinformation.
The Centers for Disease Control
and Prevention (CDC) has
regulations on the importation
of dogs and cats into the United
States. In general, they require
that dogs be vaccinated against
rabies at least 30 days prior to
entry, except for puppies
younger than 3 months and dogs
originated or located for 6
months in areas considered to be
free of rabies. A dog with an
unexpired health certificate
meets these requirements. This
information is verifiable at the
CDC website. The US Department
of Agriculture has certain
restrictions on the importation
of dogs imported from any part
of the world except Canada,
Mexico, and regions of Central
America and the West Indies.
Only those dogs that are to be
used in the handling of
livestock must be inspected and
quarantined at the port of entry
for a sufficient time to
determine their freedom from
tapeworm. Dogs that are imported
into Hawaii are quarantined for
130 days. There are no
quarantine regulations for
"pets" or "strays". It is
monetarily advantageous for
groups with a "non-profit"
status, who, at the same time,
claim the country is
"overpopulated," to import
puppies for resale or "adoption"
- for a non-reportable fee.
There are some special
circumstances regarding dogs
imported from areas known to be
infested with screwworms or foot
and mouth disease, but the
general rule is that all dogs
are only subject to inspection
at ports of entry for evidence
of infectious diseases that can
be transmitted to humans. As a
result of this missing link in
governmental importation
regulation, statistics of
imported dogs are estimated
according to Port of Entry
reporting.
On April 2, 2008, the Division
of Viral and Rickettsial
Diseases of the CDC, filed a
report regarding Importation of
Dogs into the United States and
in the summary of that report it
states:
"The importation of dogs into
the United States poses a risk
for the introduction of rabies
and other zoonotic diseases.
Federal regulations (42 CFR
71.51) currently require proof
of valid rabies vaccination for
imported dogs, but allow the
importation of some unvaccinated
dogs, including dogs less than 3
months of age, provided certain
requirements for confinement are
met until the dog is vaccinated.
Although there are no accurate
surveillance data on the number
of dogs imported each year, it
is estimated based on
extrapolated data that over
287,000 dogs were imported into
the United States during 2006.
Of these, approximately 25% were
either too young to be
vaccinated or lacked proof of
valid rabies vaccination. Import
trends suggest that an
increasing number of
unvaccinated puppies are being
imported into the United States,
mostly through commercial
resale or rescue operations."
Since 2006, that 287,000 per
year has doubled. Importation
from Canada, Mexico, Central
America and the West Indies,
where no regulations are
required, continues on a daily
basis. The majority of dogs
imported are puppies and small
breeds that are far more
acceptable to the general public
than large dogs and much easier
to resale or adopt out - for a
fee.
Not counted in the CDC's
estimated number of imports are
those dogs that are brought into
the country by various groups,
such as Compassion Without
Borders (who partners with
another organization in
Albuquerque, New Mexico to bring
MexiMutts into the U.S). United
Hope for Animals in Southern
California, Doglandia (a
People's guide to Mexico, asks
to adopt a dog during your trip
to the country), Blue RoadRunner,
and SAMM (Save a Mexican Mutt)
are only a handful of such
groups bringing dogs into the
United States from Mexico. This
doesn't include those groups
bringing dogs in from Central
America, Puerto Rico or the West
Indies. These imported dogs are
flown, driven, shipped,
transported and sent to shelters
throughout the United States.
Shelter owners say the
importation programs are safe,
moral and in demand. Although
the work that these people do is
admirable, one has to ask - What
are their definitions of safe
and moral? Bringing in dogs of
questionable background and
health issues from other
countries while our own American
dogs are euthanized is NOT safe
or moral nor humane for those
dogs already in shelters across
the U.S. Accusing American
breeders of causing
overpopulation and high shelter
kill rates is not safe, moral,
just or fair, especially when
the problems exist all - for a
fee.
Groups that convince the public
that breeding should be
restricted or banned should be
looked at closely by
legislators. Somebody has got to
ask the question sooner or
later. If all breeding is
regulated, restricted or banned,
how would these non profit
groups continue to operate?
The answer is simple. They don't
need breeders here. They can
continue to plead to the
American public's emotions about
some dog in BF Egypt while they
pursue the removal of the
American dog breeders and their
Constitutional Rights. That's
how big business works. In order
to make more money, to get more
orders or to increase the profit
margin, they remove anything or
anybody that could be remotely
considered as competition while
still keeping their sources in
place. You won't see non profit
importing groups pushing for the
demise of all breeding or
mandatory sterilization in those
countries. It's not good sense
to eliminate your sources if
your intention is to continue in
the business of filling shelters
and rescue groups offering
animals that were "rescued from
a puppy mill" to the
unsuspecting public to adopt -
for a fee.
Now that you have access to
verifiable facts, you can ask
those who do the importing
yourself. More than likely,
you'll be told they do it "to
save the dogs". You can then ask
them why they aren't spending
that money and time on the
alleged "oversurplus" dogs that
are already here. I wonder if
any of them will be honest
enough to tell you. The general
public needs to learn to
research issues and think for
themselves prior to repeating
comments that they have been
spoon fed over the years. They
need to stop listening to those
whose intentions are less than
honest and ask for facts and
verifiable proof - or can you
only get that information from
those who lead you down their
dishonest, profitable path - for
a fee?
http://www.thedogplace.org/PROJECTS/10021-Shelter-Imports_Witouski.asp
Read Rebuttal Letter:
http://www.thedogplace.org/PROJECTS/Rescue-Rebuttal_Metcalf-1002.asp