This HSUS, PETA, Legislative Perspective from the American Feed Industry PAC is a real eye-opener ...

Dog owners have been over-inoculated with the Animal Rights agenda, the result being they have become immune to “AR stuff.”

Dog fanciers just don’t want to deal with it. They “don’t breed that much” or they’ve “gone underground.” But the Animal Rights people keep on keeping on and their success affects everyone’s daily life. You don't think so?  Well how about a 90% increase in the price of milk, eggs, and beef? The Calif. egg bill that passed in 2008 is just one example that affected you in the grocery store.

But its not just PAWS. It is about who will make the laws that rule our lives. Favor-seeking, corrupt, ignorant politicians almost crammed California’s 1634 down our throats. Thanks to professional lobbying groups PetPac, ASDA, ADOA, SAOVA and others, it didn’t happen.

We need more individuals like Bob Kane and John Yates who can spot a barracuda even when it looks like a goldfish. Bob Kane has retired, turning the reins over to Susan Wolf, a highly respected, hard-working “dog person”. To support this formidable force working for you on “Issue lobbying and to identify and elect supportive legislators” go to http://saova.org/ and subscribe!

This info from the Cattle Network, courtesy of SAOVA, directly reflects on the crisis in dog breeding.

Steve Kopperud has special expertise in agriculture and food issues. Prior to joining Policy Directions Inc., he was the senior vice president of the American Feed Industry Association (AFIA) for more than 18 years, where he headed state and federal government affairs programs, and was treasurer of the Feed Industry Political Action Committee (FIPAC). Steve is also former president of the Animal Industry Foundation (AIF), and chairs the Farm Animal Welfare Coalition (FAWC).

Kopperud’s comments and analysis defining the animal rights movement strategy in this Cattle Network interview below is a must read for all.

Jolley: Five Minutes with Steve Kopperud, Senior V.P., Policy Directions

Kopperud has spoken to audiences in North and South America about the threats to food production mounted by such well-funded organizations as HSUS and PETA. At each appearance, Kopperud explains the threats behind the recent successes of animal activism and what is means to future of beef producers.

He tells a blunt and take-no-prisoners story about the very effective but sometimes questionable public relations techniques employed by animal activist groups.

Q. Steve, we know the animal rights organizations tend to be well-funded, sophisticated communicators. Let's define them, first. What are the organizations we should watch and what are their agendas? Tell me about the size of their memberships and their war chests.

A. Fifteen years ago we were confronted by about 150 animal rights organizations, subject to infighting and competition. Today, the movement is defined by the Humane Society of the U.S. and its president, Wayne Pacelle. When Pacelle joined HSUS as vice president, he declared he would create the “NRA (National Rifle Assn.) of animal rights, and he’s well on his way. The organization leverages its public image as a dog/cat, spay/neuter, pet adoption group, positioning itself as “moderate” in comparison to the PETAs of the movement. When you peel away the layers of public image, you’re left with an HSUS agenda that is anything but moderate, and not too radically different than that of PETA. You need only look at the organization’s legislative agenda, the comments of some of its officers, to see where HSUS would eventually hope to see animal agriculture wind up.

HSUS claims to have about 10 million members – 20,000 per congressional district – and has an annual budget in excess of $130 million. Through mergers with smaller organizations, HSUS has grown, and under Pacelle’s watch, created the Humane Legislative Action Fund (HLAF) not-for-profit association with no limits on its lobbying activity – HSUS, by virtue of its 501(c) (3) status, is limited by IRS rules to about spending 20% of its previous year’s program spending on “advocacy,” so the HLAF is an important tool. On the international front, Humane Society International works as an arm of HSUS.

PETA continues to be the noisemaker; its apparent role is to keep the issue in the press, thereby keeping it mainstream. Its income each year continues to hover in the $20-30 million range, allowing it to maintain its global network of offices and harassment. However, PETA has so marginalized itself in policy discussions as to be almost a non-player.

PETA continues to frighten corporate targets, major brands which fear PETA will begin boycotts, pickets, disrupt annual meetings, etc. PETA’s outrageous behavior and unrealistic demands enable groups such as HSUS to contact the same target companies, offering itself as the “moderate” group with which the company can work. The company believes that by working with HSUS, it’s somehow protected from PETA. Not so. The company is only protected as long as it toes the line, issuing public statements about animal housing, care and such. The worst thing any company can do is try to negotiate with any animal rights group. It signals weakness and fear and sets the company up as a perpetual target for other groups.

Farm Sanctuary, with a budget of about $1 million a year, operates almost as an independent subsidiary of HSUS, acting as HSUS’s foot soldiers on the ground in the various states in which HSUS has begun referenda campaigns, etc.

Click Here for FULL INTERVIEW http://www.cattlenetwork.com