THE PAWS ACT
(SB1139/HR2669)
by
Dr. Carmen Battaglia
- June 30, 2005
Thank you for taking the time to contact me regarding AKC's support for the
legislation that is being proposed by the Republican Senator Rick Santorum from
Pennsylvania.
As you may know, four AKC directors voted against the motion to
support the proposed legislation. Those dissenting were: Carmen Battaglia, Tom
Davies, Patti Strand and Ken Marden.
I am, with this memo answering your inquiry
and I am speaking only for myself. Since you took the time to contact me with
your questions, you deserve a response.
Let me begin by saying that when people in a family disagree, we don't divorce.
We continue to support each other even though we differ on strategy. The right
to dissent should not be confused with disloyalty. I think you will better
understand my point after you finish reading my response to your email.
To begin, it is unlikely that the goals of the PAWS statue can be reached by
expanding Federal oversight to the small-scale breeder who produces puppies and
kittens as a hobby. In simple terms, AKC has always argued against the use of
numbers to define hobby breeders. The reason was and is that numbers can always
be changed along with the definitions. A small change here and there overtime
could easily change things and eventually it could be difficult to be defined as
a hobby breeder. The history of the Animal Rights extremists on this point is
clear. They have always worked to first get their foot in the door, and then
they begin to work on their target by changing definitions, which widens their
influence. The fundamental argument that is being used regarding the need for
this legislation in my judgment is flawed. There is no documented record that we
are being "bombarded with horror stories from fanciers about commercial
importers and the "puppy mills" who are evading federal regulation". If there is
such a report it still would not justify having the federal government coming
into our residence, telling hobby breeders how to breed and raise their litters.
Senator Santorum has a long history of wanting to regulate hobby breeders. In
2000, he proposed legislation focused on dog breeding practices, socialization
standards, and the idea of 3 strikes and your out (you lose your license to
breed). In November of 2003, this Senator along with representative Whitfield
made another attempt to regulate hobby breeders. They reintroduced the Puppy
Protection Act. This time the emphasis was placed on setting a breeding limit on
all bitches. AKC's lobbyist Jim Holt, said that these efforts were " the brain
child of the HSUS", "a radical animal rights advocate" group. He went on to say
that "we can look forward to the socialization standard returning in some form".
One of the most dangerous parts of PAWS is that for the first time it will
inject the federal government into regulations about whether, when and how
animals (dogs) can be bred". Once the government is able to establish this
principle, others can work on the details of making changes later. The first
step in their strategy is to get the hobby breeders "to admit that a problem
exists". AKC has always believed that "the answer is not in expanding the scope
of the law but in more effective enforcement." That has not changed. Over
regulation always leads to unintended consequences. The argument that the
importers and those who sell on the Internet need to be regulated by the federal
government should not be linked to the hobby breeder. Using numbers like 25
puppies sold a year and breeding less than 7 litters on your premises should not
be the way to exclude hobby breeders by law. We should not forget that there
still remains several other important issues that have not been developed and
the negotiations are not over. What this means is that the numbers 25 and 7 can
be changed with a simple word or two. For example, 25 pups can become 10, and 7
litters can become 3 litters. What the Senator still has not addressed involves
his intentions about several other areas. He has yet to explain what he intends
to do about:
-
The scope
of the minimum "humane care standards" and the penalties for
breeders.
-
The
provisions covering breeders who raise puppies in their
homes.
-
The
language that authorizes the USDA to certify inspection
programs of non-governmental organizations. This area
includes private inspections by contractors which is of
particular concern due to a frequent pattern of
incompetence, abuse and corruption where organizations have
already been employed by state and local jurisdictions.
-
The
non-profit entitles such as the shelters and whether they
will be excluded.
Given all of these uncertainties, there is good reason for concern about PAWS
which is a poorly written statute.
What to do was a question many of you ask. To date, my email box has over 600
emails from dog owners. It is impossible to read all of them. But if I received
600 letters, that would be a different matter. The last time this Senator
attempted to regulate hobby breeders we suggested that you and each of your
members and clubs write your US Senator and Representative. Ask them to not
co-sponsor or support PAWS. That approached worked and the statue died. In this
case, we need to be realistic; this Senator is a ranking Republican. He can
probably get support in the Senate. However, the PAWS statue must still be voted
on by the House of Representatives. So your second letter should be sent to your
Congressmen. Remember that this is a time sensitive problem. If you plan to let
your US Senators and Congressmen know about your feelings and how you want them
to vote, act now. Send letters, emails will not pay off.
Your friends, neighbors, clubs and organizations can defeat this bill or remove
from it all reference to hobby breeders by the numbers.
Thanks for your concern. I hope these answers have addressed your questions.
https://www.thedogplace.org/PAWS/Against-PAWS_Battaglia.asp #1110
Project PAWS 2005 Why is PAWS
considered the single most important battle in the history of hobby
breeders?? If you have quality pets, read and understand why they may
disappear.
Project: PAWS 2005 INTRODUCTION
Dr. Carmen L. Battaglia is
a well-known and respected figure in the dog world. He is also the German
Shepherd Dog Club of America delegate and one of the four AKC directors who
voted against the AKC's support of S1139 (PAWS) on June 12, 2005. His statement
indicates that the AKC's underlying rationale is flawed, the bill itself poorly
written and dangerous and he urges its defeat. Dr. Battaglia resides in Georgia.
Dr. Battaglia's impressive resume and website link is provided below.
(resource http://saova.org/archive/PAWS/SAOVA%20Alert%20PAWS%20Call%20to%20Action.pdf)
|
PAWS INFORMATION