Frankie The Law Dog

Five Hundred Dogs and 15 Cats Rescued from Puppy Mill

More than 500 dogs and 15 cats were rescued on Tuesday from an alleged puppy mill in Kaufman County, Texas.  According to news reports, the Humane Society began investigating the operation when someone came to them asking about dog food donations for the animals.

Puppy Mill Kept Dogs in Deplorable Conditions

The Humane Society of Cedar Creek Lake and the Kaufman County Sheriff’s Department conducted the raid, and found the animals being kept in deplorable conditions.  Mainly consisting of small breeds such as poodles and Chihuahuas, the dogs were housed in filthy conditions where they were exposed to the elements at all times.

Many of the dogs, in addition to having severely matted coats, were found suffering from a range of serious medical conditions, including infected wounds, internal and external parasites, and skin and eye infections.  According to the Humane Society’s report, “It is obvious that many of these animals have never known life outside their wire cages.”

All of the animals were quickly removed and transported to an emergency shelter specially set up for this rescue operation.  The Kaufman County Sheriff’s Department has provided 24-hour security to the emergency shelter to ensure the safety of the rescued animals, which were all given appropriate emergency medical care by a team of veterinarians.

The operation was made possible in part by funding provided to the Humane Society by the Kenneth and Lillian Wilde Foundation, who created the Wilde Puppy Mill Task Force to rescue animals from abusive puppy mills.

How to Put Puppy Mills Out of Business

Put Puppy Mills out of Business by Adopting Your New Best Friend from a Shelter

In addition to the good work being done by groups such as the Humane Society of the United States and legislative efforts going on in several states to try and stem the tide of abusive puppy mills, the best way to put puppy mills out of business to starve them out economically.  That means refusing to purchase any dog that is the product of a puppy mill.

The Humane Society offers the following tips for making sure your next puppy does not come from a puppy mill:

• Adopt a puppy from a shelter.  These animals need you as much as you need them.  Both of our dogs are adoptees, having been abandoned by their original owners.  It gives us satisfaction every day to know that we saved their lives.  They bring us immeasurable joy without a dime having gone into the pocket of a puppy mill breeder.
• Find a responsible breeder and pay a personal visit to their facility.  There are many responsible breeders out there.  A personal visit to the breeder will allow you to assess how the facility is housing and caring for the dogs.  At a minimum, they should be receiving adequate food, water, exercise, grooming, socialization and veterinary care, and should not be spending their lives confined to cages.
• Avoid pet stores.  Period.  They buy their dogs from puppy mills.  How else would they make a profit off of each animal?
• Don’t be fooled by advertising claims that a breeder’s animals are kept in humane conditions.  In other words, going back to a previous point, don’t purchase a dog from a breeder if you can’t personally visit the facility and ensure it is not a puppy mill.
• Don’t try to “rescue” a puppy from a puppy mill by purchasing it.  Every dollar you put into the pocket of a puppy mill breeder perpetuates the scourge of puppy mills.  If you encounter a breeder you think might be operating a puppy mill, contact your local authorities and the Humane Society immediately.
• For more great tips, see the Humane Society’s Puppy Buyer’s Guide.

The North Carolina Senate has passed a bill that targets the kind of abusive practices by some commercial dog breeders that have earned them the name “puppy mill” and that have caused misery to countless animals in their custody.  The measure follows the shutdown of two large puppy mills in that state in February and its passage has been controversial, with the American Kennel Club claiming the bill would burden dog “owners,” and not just breeders.

Law will Regulate Commercial Dog Breeders to Prevent Puppy Mills

New S.C. Law Seeks to End Animal Cruelty by Puppy Mills

Senate Bill 460 clearly defines a “commercial breeder” as any person who owns or maintains 15 or more intact female dogs of breeding age and 30 or more puppies primarily for the purpose of sale.  The measure provides for the establishment of minimum humane standards for the care of animals at commercial dog breeding operations, including the provision of adequate housing, exercise, food, water and veterinary care.

Commercial Dog Breeders must Register with the State and be Subject to Inspection

The measure provides that no commercial breeder will be permitted to operate in North Carolina without first registering with the state.  In order to register, the breeder must be in compliance with all established standards for the care of the dogs.  Failure to register constitutes a Class 2 misdemeanor and may subject the breeder to an injunction.  Commercial dog breeding operations are subject to inspection by authorities upon reports of inhumane conditions.

Penalties for Failing to Provide Adequate Minimum Humane Treatment

Under the new law, the failure of a commercial breeder to adequately house, exercise, feed, water and provide veterinary care for the animals in its custody is a Class 3 misdemeanor and will result in a fine of not less than $50 per day per animal.  Any commercial animal breeder convicted of a violation will lose its registration, meaning that it can no longer operate in the state.

Abusive Puppy Mills in North Carolina

The legislation comes partly as a response to an incident in February in which local authorities, along with the Humane Society, raided and shut down two abusive puppy mills in Wayne County, North Carolina.  According to a Humane Society press release congratulating lawmakers on passing the legislation:

[More than 300] dogs were housed in filthy, cold, cramped cages without access to exercise, adequate veterinary care, or human contact.  Many of the dogs were covered with fecal encrusted dreadlocks and suffered from severe skin and eye infections.  Some had chain collars embedded in their necks.

American Kennel Club Opposed the Measure

The American Kennel Club opposed the measure, arguing, among other things, that it would add a “duplicative layer of regulation on responsible dog owners and breeders in North Carolina.”  The measure, however, does not apply to mere dog “owners.”  It applies only to clearly defined commercial dog breeders.  Moreover, it appears that at least some commercial dog breeders have proven incapable of self-regulation to the detriment of the health and wellbeing of hundreds of dogs in their care.

The law becomes effective May 1, 2010, and applies to the commercial breeding of dogs on or after that date.

More States on Board with Puppy Mill Legislation

According to the Humane Society, Louisiana, Pennsylvania and Virginia passed laws in 2008 targeting puppy mills.  Arizona, Indiana, Oregon, Tennessee and Washington state passed laws in 2009 to cracking down on puppy mills.  Several other states are now considering puppy mill legislation.

Stephen Bottila claims his German shepherd mix dog is a service animal and that Madison, Wisconsin police unlawfully ejected him from a restaurant and a city park with his dog in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Bottila contends the dog has the ability to alert him to oncoming epileptic seizures.

But a former Madison police officer testified in a deposition that the dog lacked a harness or any other item identifying it as a service dog at the time of the incident at the park.  In the lawsuit, the City of Madison denies that the dog is, in fact, a service dog and challenges whether Bottila has a legitimate need to be accompanied by the dog.

Legal Definition of a Service Animal

According to the U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division:

The ADA defines a service animal as any guide dog, signal dog, or other animal individually trained to provide assistance to an individual with a disability. If they meet this definition, animals are considered service animals under the ADA regardless of whether they have been licensed or certified by a state or local government.

It is not required that service animals wear special harnesses or collars, and proof of a person’s medical condition or the dog’s certification as a service dog may not be demanded as a condition of allowing the dog to accompany the person.

A Service Dog is Any Animal Individually Trained to Provide Assistance to a Person with a Disability

Bottila’s Civil Rights Lawsuit may Test the Definition of Service Dog

Bottila’s civil rights lawsuit is scheduled to begin Monday in federal district court, and a pending motion by the city asks the judge to exclude the dog from the courtroom.  The city argues that its presence in court would suggest to the jury that the judge believes the dog is a service animal.

The City argues that whether the dog is a bona fide service animal “or merely a pet” is a disputed fact in the case.

Since the incidents that gave rise to the lawsuit, Bottila was subdued with pepper spray and a Taser after he refused to leave a restaurant where the manager sought to eject him because of the dog.  Madison Police Captain Victor Wahl maintains the officers acted appropriately because Bottila had finished eating and had no more business in the restaurant and he resisted officers’ attempts to remove him.

Update:  The Dog will be Permitted in Court

From the Wisconsin State Journal:

U.S. District Judge Barbara Crabb said she will allow Stephen Bottila to bring Justice, a German shepherd mix Bottila says is a seizure-alert dog, into the courtroom during the trial that begins Monday.

Legislators in Massachusetts are considering a bill that would amend the state’s animal cruelty statute to include a ban on devocalization surgery on dogs.  The procedure, intended to eliminate or “soften” a dog’s bark,  severs the animal’s vocal chords.

Devocalization or Debarking Eliminates a Dog's Ability to Bark Normally

In recent weeks, the state Judiciary committee heard testimony on both sides of the issue.  Proponents of the bill argued that devocalization surgery presents serious health risks such as aspiration pheumonia, chronic coughing or gagging and breathing problems.  Opponents contended that more dogs would end up in shelters and would then be difficult to place if debarking surgery is outlawed.

Some opponents of legislation outlawing debarking procedures argue that if all training efforts fail, a dog that constantly barks will end up being euthanized.  They argue that debarking or devocalization should be permitted as a last resort.  At the other end of the spectrum are those who oppose such legislation because it would infringe on their choice for a quick solution to an annoyance.

Other U.S. states, including California, New Jersey and Ohio, have attempted, without success, to broadly ban devocalization procedures.  The United Kingdom prohibits devocalization, tail docking and ear cropping on dogs, as well as declawing on cats.