Projects & Politics > Federal
Legs Index >> PAWS
Index
THE
FANCY QUESTIONS PAWS
AND SANTORUM'S AMENDMENT TO THE AWA
We are having trouble getting answers for you and again, as stated on this digital publication, read the proposed amendment. Know that as AKC has said, it is only the first draft, thrown out there to test the waters. There will be some degree of debate in the Senate and House, depending on who wants to hang onto who’s coattails. It could go through like green fruit in the early spring! It will depend on how swiftly and strongly you react – and that depends on your understanding of the real threat.
No offense to doctors but here’s the bitter pill as it applies to PAWS. Your doctor sends you to a surgeon because you have chronic belly pain and he says, as they do, “oh no problem, we’ll just take that gall bladder out and everything will be fine.” Depending on how reassuring and convincing he was, and how severe your attacks have been, you would probably give up a part of your body without asking what the side effects could be. Hopefully, that analogy will get you thinking clearly, do you really care so little about a part of your life that you will give it up without asking how bad it will hurt? What will the side effects be? Is there a better remedy?
You need straight answers and here are the questions that we have received and which so far, have not been answered. Most have not even been addressed by our leaders who seem pitifully hog-tied on the subject. (Sorry PETA, there’s more where that came from.) You are invited to provide credible information or answers, not just speculation. Here is a sampling of the best questions we received.
1) Jim Holt says USDA wanted to regulate everyone who “maintains” more than 3 breeding females regardless of whether they are bred. Is that because he read Senator Santorum’s comments or does it actually say that in the current AWA?
2) What is the truth here? Are Imported dog statistics available from USDA under the freedom of information act?
3) Our group would like to know if this is true. Mr. Menaker says, and we’re quoting, “both conditions must be met (7 litters, sell 25 or more dogs) before a breeder comes before the USDA; thus, if you produce less than seven litters, your are not subject to regulation, even if you sell many more than 25 dogs. Similarly, if you sell fewer than 25 dogs, you can have in excess of six litters and not be covered.” Save that promise from AKC and see how it plays out.
4) I read that the AKC President said “the bill will only apply to less than four percent of our customers who register litters, the majority of whom are already subject to USDA regulations.” How can I find any previous computer reports that show that? I am a data entry tech and I know how computers can be made to show anything depending on how the data is manipulated. Has that been published in the Gazette? Where is Herm David?
5) WHO CAME UP WITH PAWS? Did Santorum just wake up and decide it was a good campaign strategy? The public sure doesn’t care. Was this a sneaky come back from a defeated Doris Day? Somebody should be taking credit for the idea but it is like having a military coup and no one takes credit. Do you know or am I missing something?
6) What has DDAL (Doris Day Animal League) and PETA said about PAWS? Why are they so quiet?
7) How will USDA know who is breeding what, and where they were raised? I think it was this site that said we would have to be inspected? Does that mean door to door like Denver?
8) Our club voted to send a letter to AKC opposing this nonsense but we have not had a response. We appreciate what you people are doing but it looks like we are going to be ignored.
With the exception of Mr. Menaker's few reassurances, there is little we can say to assuage your concerns. Sorry. Stay tuned as we bring you the latest on PAWS.