Fighting Puppy Mills – Do have what it takes? She does.

A couple of months ago, I met a wonderful animal advocate named Dana Fedman, after she left a comment on my blog. Dana is a CPDT-KA dog trainer from the great state of Iowa, but she is also actively involved in fighting puppy mills, Breed-Specific Legislation and other animal advocacy issues in her state. I was so fascinated by Dana and her motivation to get actively involved in some of the issues that I feel so strongly about, especially puppy mill legislation, that I asked her for an interview. Below, is that interview in its entirety. My hope is that by sharing Dan’s story and how she got involved in being an advocate for animals, it might motivate others (like you) to get involved too. (Please note: This interview occurred on 2011. I am posting it now – in March 2012 – as part of my puppy mill series.)

I chose to share this interview with you this week because I am hoping it will motivate you to contact your state legislator or to sign the petition asking state legislators to pass the MN Dog and Cat Breeder Regulation Bill. Looking to do more? Here are some ideas on how to get involved with the Breeder regulation Bill in Minnesota.

My thanks to Dana for being so willing to answer my many questions about what she does.

1. You have been involved in the work to change the Iowa law regarding enforcement of the Animal Welfare Act for USDA licensed kennels. How did you first get started?

I took some instruction on lobbying from our local shelter a few years ago but had never worked up the gumption to actually go to the State Capitol and personally speak to my representatives. My involvement in the past was limited to writing e-mails or faxes and making phone calls, leaving messages at the switchboard, and whenever possible telling my senator or representative about my perspective on how these laws affect companion animals and the people who purchase pets from high-volume commercial breeders.

2. What motivated you to first get involved?

Seeing firsthand the heartache and financial loss experienced by hapless consumers of factory-farmed dogs.

3. Were you nervous about getting involved? And, if so, how did you overcome it?

As a former radio announcer, it’s not difficult for me to write or speak in public. The way to overcome your fear of that is to focus on writing to or talking to one friendly person while at the same time remembering that everyone puts their pants on one leg at a time! What is difficult for me is knowing all the angles of the issue so that potential objections are answered early in the conversation and to restrict what I say to bullet points.

4. What surprised you once you did get involved?

How little difference there is between politics in adult life and life on the grade school playground.

5. As an animal advocate in Iowa, what are some of the things you have done to try to influence your state representatives?

I’ve worked up to speaking directly to my legislators by volunteering for our open-access shelter. Through that experience I’ve learned how things work regarding companion animals in Iowa, and it’s not pretty.

I’ve worked with the shelter’s leadership to change Des Moines’ breed-specific ordinance and lay groundwork for State “puppy lemon laws.”

I’ve spoken at Des Moines City Council meetings on several non-animal issues the last few years, one that affected a real estate development in my neighborhood that would have literally crushed the streets and storm water infrastructure. We fought City Hall and won!

During the work on BSL, I gave them a presentation on dog bite statistics and how our City’s Animal Control was spending more time impounding “vicious by breed” dogs who weren’t running at large or biting people than dealing with actual animal control!

After volunteering as a trainer at that shelter for quite a few years, I used other skills by helping to write new model dangerous/vicious dog ordinances that are now used in our region, but sadly, not in Des Moines.

A few years ago, I had a phone conversation with a high-level staff member of an influential (on Senate ag and ag appropriations committees) senator about proposed changes to the federal Animal Welfare Act as it applies to puppy factories and what the outcome is for consumers.

When there is an animal welfare issue that needs phone calls, faxes or e-mails, I am on a list of grassroots contacts to phone, fax or write legislators at a moment’s notice.

There was a Lobby Day and Iowa Voters for Companion Animals put out a plea for people to come to the Capitol and talk to legislators about the “Ag-Gag Bill.” I finally decided to try it and actually go there and talk to my legislators face-to-face. This is a bill making it illegal to photograph, take video or sound recordings inside an animal facility or any other agricultural business, or to possess photographs, video or sound recordings of the same. The bill also proposes to make it illegal to take a job at an agricultural business under false pretenses with the purpose of “staging” animal abuse only to photograph, video and/or sound record and selectively edit it, thereby damaging and interrupting the business to fundraise for animal rights groups thereby dismantling the entire agricultural industry. Uh-huh. I’m serious.

I talked to my Senator about this bill that had already passed the House. I’d called and e-mailed him many times on this issue. He was responsive, but felt that there was a difference between livestock and companion animal agriculture and that the Ag-Gag bill would not affect dog breeders. My senator could not tell me how this bill excluded puppy factories and I was not satisfied with that answer.

I went to the Representative who introduced the Ag-Gag bill and talked to her for almost an hour. She had recently spoken at the Iowa Pet Breeders Association’s annual conference. This is the commercial high-volume dog breeder’s trade group. She had her eyes opened to what a “puppy mill” is. I came down hard on her for introducing the Ag-Gag bill. She insisted that employees and managers of agribusiness should be the only ones to report mistreatment of animals in these facilities to authorities.

She did provide me with an answer about the reason puppy factories were excluded from the Ag-Gag bill: this category of commercial breeders were never included in the definition of “animal facility” within the bill. Therefore, they would not need to be excluded. Even so, there are usually other livestock on the premises of these breeding facilities that would be included in the Ag-Gag bill. (Did you get all that? I know.)

6. What has been your greatest challenge in trying to change your state’s laws? Your greatest frustration?

With the Ag-Gag Bill, my greatest frustrations are: 1) the unwillingness of the livestock producers and their trade associations to stop protecting their bad actors; and, 2) big ag controls more than I ever imagined.

7. What advice would you have for anyone interested in becoming involved in working to change the animal welfare laws in their own state?

Please, please become involved in your local shelter as either a donor or a volunteer. Foster homes are desperately needed. Supplies are needed. Educate yourself on animal neglect and cruelty issues in your state.

Encourage friends and family how to recognize a puppy mill (www.pupquest.org). Avoid buying dogs from the newspaper, pet stores (unless they are adopting out homeless pets), the internet, or a website where you are not allowed to see where the animals are kept or meet the parents.

Find out if dogfighting and cockfighting are common in your state. Are they felonies?

Check into breed-specific ordinances brewing in your city.

8. What’s up next for you? What are you working on now?

I’m waiting for the next Legislative session to start. The Ag-Gag bill did not make it to the Senate floor last session. The Legislature had to work overtime for two months on a two-year budget and a $5.9 billion spending plan. Ag-Gag will undoubtedly spit up on the calendar sometime during the upcoming session starting January 9. If I’m needed, I’ll call, e-mail, fax or go down there and squeak up!

(Blogger’s Note: Sadly, the Ag-Gag bill did indeed pass in Iowa just a few weeks ago. I wrote about this news just recently, but I encourage you to check out the impacts this bill will have on animal advocacy in the The Gazette.

Proposals, puppy mills and postulations

I’ve been involved in a rather long discourse (over several days) with someone on a friend’s page. The topic? The new regulations being proposed by the USDA regarding the retail sale of pets, over the internet and elsewhere. These regulations would revise the current version of the Animal Welfare Act, which is the overarching federal law governing cat and dog breeders.

Currently, the Animal Welfare Act does not include governance over the retail sale of cats and dogs who are sold directly to consumers, “such as through websites, by telephone, at parking lots or from the kennel.”

More and more puppy millers are selling their dogs over the internet without any fear of being exposed. It’s a much more anonymous process for them. They can hide all the bad stuff, like: animal abuse, lack of vet care, poor living conditions for the animals, sick dogs and cats, etc. It’s much easier to fool the general public over the internet when they can’t see your facility and you don’t face inspection by the USDA.

The long running discourse began with the following postulation.

“Before everyone gets on the “Yahoo” bandwagon on this, please realize that any legislation that attempts to regulate folks in the way this one does is only going to get the honest and responsible folks. Limits on pet numbers is just the first PETA and HSUS step to get their foot in the door and then watch the numbers lower down. Who is gonna regulate the folks who backyard breed? How will they track folks who advertise in the newspapers or on internet?? Use a different phone number, a different email addy, a different ‘kennel’ name and in the eyes of the govt, they are different folks. The responsible breeders, who do the testing–health and genetic–and participate in dog sports and dog shows and breed only to better the breed are gonna be the ones who get hurt by this until—you and I can no longer own pets. Not a world I choose to live in. And no, I am not a breeder, yes I do rescue, yes I am a responsible pet owner who cares deeply about my dogs and any future dogs I will share my life with. This is not the way to fix things.”

I looked at this comment with some skepticism. When someone says something like “this is how PETA and HSUS plans to control you”, my feelers start twitching. It’s too close to Humane Watch propaganda to not have them twitch, but then another commenter asked “Is this bill funded in a self sustaining manner? Is there staffing? The USDA is overwhelmed and underfunded.” Now those are good questions, I thought. The USDA isn’t doing a good job inspecting the breeders they are supposed to be inspecting now. How could they possibly take on more?

This same commenter goes on to say that we should focus on enforcing current laws versus adding more laws. But, is that really an option? Current laws are all over the place depending on which state you live in. There is no national legislation around the retail sale of puppies and kitties. So are these the only options? To either support legislation that may not be able to be enforced effectively or to not support it at all? That seems rather limited doesn’t it?

To me, doing nothing seems like no option at all. We’re already way behind the puppy millers. They’re using the internet to sell their puppies and kitties now. (Heck, even eBay helps them out!) And, puppy millers now have access to folks who are willing to look the other way as long as they get paid to create their websites for them. So, do we not support a bill that captures the outliers, those flying under the radar? Or, do we support it and hope that the enforcement will come? I prefer the latter to the former.

TheBreederRatings.com: Exposing Unethical Breeding Using Social Media

A little over a month ago, I stumbled upon this post talking about a new website called TheBreederRatings.com.

Intrigued. I decided to check it out. According to their Home Page, their mission is “… to expose breeders through your experiences, whether they be a reputable breeder concerned about the welfare of their pups, or a puppy mill looking to turn a profit.”

A worthy goal. I am all for the elimination of puppy mills and backyard breeders, but I’ll admit it. I was skeptical. Could something like this work? And, who was behind this concept? And, were they legitimately interested in stopping puppy mills?

As it turns out… they are! And, there is a great story behind why TheBreederRatings.com was developed. I asked Co-Founder, Wayne Yung, for an e-mail interview to talk about his website and how it all began.

How did you come up with the idea for TheBreederRatings.com?
I have been a dog lover for years. Last year, my golden retriever turned 12 and was slowing down. I decided it was a great time for an addition to the family and sought out a bulldog. Thinking that the young energy of a puppy could really help my golden to stay active, I went the breeder route. Although I’d heard of “backyard breeding”, I didn’t fully understand the widespread problem of unethical breeding. I bought Hank through a breeder that turned out to be a broker who purchased the dogs from a puppy mill — of course, I didn’t find all this out until my dog, Hank, started having serious medical problems and began to research the situation. After seeing how serious and rampant the problem of unethical breeding is, I felt obligated to do what I can to stop it. Fortunately, I’m in the marketing industry and have access to resources for creating a website and some basic marketing material. Now, we are just relying on the power of social media to help spread the word!

What do you hope to accomplish with your website?
The mission of the website is to stop unethical breeding. In order to do this, we are aiming to educate others on the seriousness of the issue and provide a place for them to research breeders before purchasing a dog.

How will you [be able to] check that the person writing the review doesn’t know the breeder, is a friend of the breeder, or paid by the breeder, to make them look legitimate?
That’s a great question, and one that we thought of initially as well. The short answer is that social media sites all run a risk of having this happen to some degree. The premise of these sites is NOT to police activity, but to have an open forum. Urbanspoon.com, tripadvisor.com , and yelp are all great examples of social media in action, using only “consumer-generated” feedback to give an overall rating. It’s up to the user to filter through what appear to be bogus reviews among the majority of genuine reviews.

On the other hand, we have the ability to track IP addresses, meaning that if several ratings come from the same computer, we can investigate any suspicious activity and follow up on it. We try to keep this to a minimum, as it somewhat undermines the intention that “everyone has a voice” in social media.

Our hope is that the “overall” rating is a good indication of the quality of the breeder, and we feel that our platform supports this 100%.

What has been the feedback you’ve received so far?
The feedback has been amazing. We started with a push at pet stores (including Petco) and veterinarians, both of which have been extremely supportive and allowed us to promote the website by leaving information at their stores and offices.

You also attended the Barkworld Expo in August of this year. What reaction did you get from folks there?
Yes, Barkworld Expo was our first event, and it was really exciting to network with other companies and organizations in the industry. We had computers set up at the expo, and everyone seemed really eager to be able to share their good and bad breeder experiences with us. We also had the chance to speak with the Humane Society representatives who were very supportive of our cause. Most everyone saw thebreederratings.com as a much-needed preventative measure in the fight against unethical breeding and the overpopulation of pets.

Are there other features you plan to add to TheBreederRatings.com in the future?
We would like to expand to include Canadian breeders soon. In fact, it’s been great receiving so much feedback from the users. We have several other “suggestions” that are now being researched to see if they’re feasible right now. Most importantly, we plan to emphasize that we support rescues first and foremost. We will be adding to our website to make that more clear, and are even considering offering a directory of sorts for breed-specific rescue organizations.

You can follow TheBreederRatings.com on their blog and on Facebook and Twitter. My thanks to Wayne Yung for this interview.