Thursday, November 6, 2008

Something to Crow About

FINALLY, California has passed prop 2!!!! This is to relieve the suffering of caged food animals. And the Humane Society of the United States is to thank for spearheading the effort.
Where was Winograd during all this? No where to be found that I know of. Does he campaign or lend support to such wonderful legislation? Not that I am aware of.
Does Winograd degrade HSUS for such work? Yes, he does. Does Winograd give HSUS credit for stopping the dreadful practice of greyhound racing in Massachusetts that brings such suffering for those graceful dogs? No, he doesn't.
And people think Winograd is the "cat's meow"? When will they realize that this man really doesn't put his money where his mouth is and his actions show that he really doesn't care about the animals? Just my opinion, folks, but the track record backs me up.
Cudos to HSUS for getting this piece of legislation passed in California. It gives HSUS the backing they need to extend this legislation throughout the country. And it means a lessening of the suffering of animals that provide us with food. Maybe Winograd doesn't care about this suffering because he is a vegan. Whatever the reason, he should have been there for the animals and he wasn't. What a jerk.

18 comments:

Happy Camper said...

I read that Honesty, and the reason HSUS is so sucessful is the ammount of work and research they put into their campaigns. There is a balanace and grace required to do things legally and through channels so it becomes sustainable. I was at a long meeting tonight with several items on the agenda, it was of interest to see various groups approach the labyrinth of government procedures. Most shouted their demands and accomplished nothing for the groups they represented, others plodded through negotians and went home with a plan they could live with. Off to check on Gret.

Honesty Helps said...

A few years ago my area had a rash of stolen purebreds. They would take the dog, go a couple of blocks, check it for intact, and if it was spay/neutered, they would throw it out and the owner stood a chance of getting it back. This blogger completely overlooked that to keep your dog safe from thieves, get it altered. They steal them to breed them.

Anonymous said...

That's because the guest blogger is involved with the purebred breeding community, who doesn't want a breath of anything positive about spaying or neutering to get out

because that might lead to laws, and people looking at their breeder sold dogs that they are selling unaltered with worthless altering contracts.

call me curious said...

While I would like to see an action taken to stop this madness. I have learned from others that allegations that cannot be proven actually hurt our goal. Can anon prove KA is working for breeders, if so that should be put formt, if not; what is the point ? Inuendo is a no kill tool, it shouldn't be ours. I saw an allegation of this order on another blog and thought it makes us all appear a little ungrounded . Did anyone ever go anywhere with the " no business liscense deal?

Honesty Helps said...

Call Me Curious, one only has to look at KA's bio to determine that she has connections with breeders in that she is a K-9 dog handler. Service dogs are typically bred to be such and are typically unaltered. They were excluded from AB 1634 for mandatory spay/neuter in CA. Anon stated that she has an "involvment" with the breeders, not is working with/for them. And this is the involvement that it would be, through the service dogs she puts on her bio. I certainly didn't read any "allegation" in that comment, only an opinion based upon knowing service dogs, especially the law enforcement ones, are from breeders and are unaltered.

And currently we are awaiting on responses from the various cities about their specific requirements for business licenses.

Anonymous said...

Bloodhounds. The bloodhound breeding and sales industry.

Curious, you should consider looking into the very profitable industry of breeding and then selling dogs to police departments, the federal government, service dog groups

Some police departments and service groups use mixed breed shelter dogs and that has worked very well.

But there is a big, greedy industry involved in breeding purebreds and charging huge amounts of money for them from gullible government departments

who are spending thousands and thousands for dogs that still end up having the same problems like hip dysplasia that these breeders claim to have dealt with

This is a big government rip off that has gone unnoticed

Honesty Helps said...

And another point to make about the unaltered service dogs is that they are dangerous in public. I was a witness at an event where a young teen age girl was attacked by a police K-9 because she was on her period. Police K-9's are unaltered always. I saw another one snap at a small boy and just barely broke the skin but it could have been worse.

mastiff dad said...

I came over from Oreo for a visit. Owning two mastiff dogs both neutered, what I see from this particular comment session is an aversion to purebreds, the problem is no kill as it is being promoted. There is an anonymous blogger all over every site spewing hate about purebred animals, if this is going to become as fanatical as Winograd they are as bad as him. Are you saying only mutts have value, are you saying the working dogs have no authority to be ? Ever tried to track a kidnapper with a pit mix ? I am familiar with the great work being done with some pits, but the right to own a dog of your choice is not up for discussion here, or is it ? This anonymous poster's one size fits all plan is an insult and since I own the "problem dogs" I won't take any more of your time. I'll also let Oreo know only mutts are welcome on this site so quit sending us over here.

Honesty Helps said...

I read over the last comment more than once and also all the other comments in this section and truly fail to see the accusation of it being anti-purebreds. The last thing I want to see is an elimination of purebreds, especially the "bully" dogs. I'm crazy about mastiffs myself because I am a fan of the larger muscular dogs.

We need purebreds, but we need good ones. So much backyard breeding goes on that has destroyed certain breeds. If you, the mastiff owner, were in California, it would make you sick at what has been done to your wonderful breed. We need more responsible breeding so that the dogs don't have to suffer with genetic defects.

To set your mind at ease, all dogs, purebreds and "mutts" have equal value. I would fight just as hard to retain the purebreds as I do for the mutts. I do hope this clears up the misunderstanding. I don't feel any of these comments were speaking in terms of condemning purebreds. Breeders and their actions, yes, but purebreds, no.

Happy Camper said...

okay, I don't know if I can do this but i will try.....
"the purebred breeding community,
breeder sold dogs unaltered with worthless altering contracts.
Bloodhounds. The bloodhound breeding and sales industry.
connections with breeders in that she is a K-9 dog handler.
Curious, you should consider looking into the very profitable industry of breeding and then selling dogs to police departments, the federal government, service dog groups
But there is a big, greedy industry involved in breeding purebreds"
Let me count the ways...When is dealing with a breeder become a bad thing in this county. Clearly the anon poster doesn't know or care about the difference between puppy mills and breeders an perhaps in his mind there is not. I would guess this is the same person who got cat mom busted, the same reason bruce closed the thread and stopped the dialoge on the successive blog, the same person going on all the Seattle blogs, and perhaps even Austin. Every other word is " breeder"
(see scumbag ) It is just a very derogatory purposeless rhetoric. Our enemy at this point in time is NKS NKE NW what ever you want to call the little troll.... it is not the millions of people who own, buy or hope to buy a purebred dog.
I would like to see MSN for dogs that are not being shown or part of a proven breeding program. Unless I woke up in Russia this morning we can still pick out mates human and otherwise. I believe altering intact male poice dogs would be a good thing, I am in the minority.
As one of the " dog handler" people referenced by anon when he threw us all in the same pot, I hope if there is a riot or an earthquake in his area he gets a new understanding of breed specific needs. Until then I think he should put a zipper in it. He is running people off and saying nothing that furthers the dialogue.

Anonymous said...

happy camper, I think that maybe because you were a breeder you are somewhat biased about the purebred industry.

But,really, I think it is more that you don't understand that the breeding industry has changed since the many years ago that you were breeding.

Are you aware tht the AKC now makes its primary income from puppy mill registrations?

Are you aware that the AKC lobbies on behalf of the puppy mills, and OPPOSES things like anti-cruelty laws, breeder licensing, puppy mill rgeulations, mandatory spay neuter on behalf of its mill business partners?

That "responsible" AKC breeders have formed extremist lobbying groups like NAIA to lobby for the mills (NAIA's leader is connected to the puppy mill arm of AKC)

The humane community has pretty much abandoned Nathan Winograd. That is why Nathan Winograd has gotten involved with the breeder community.

The breeders don't care if animals are being warehoused, or dying in shelters of disease. THey only care that Nathan Winograd opposes animal control laws and laws for breeders.

It is called putting money interests above animal welfare.

The breeder community has not beenm behaving responsibly for some time.

Look in an area where they try to pass better laws, and there you will see the breeder lobby, including AKC breeders, law enforcement dog breeders, fighting dog breeders, all working TOGETHER to oppose these laws for their own financial interests.

The AKC breed club breeders lobby WITH people from the commercial pet industry, as seen in Virginia & PA, where AKC breeders were actually fighting AGAINST required euthanization by veterinarians (as opposed to shooting them in the head, which these breeders felt was just fine)

I realize, happy camper, that you are an older person and it has been some time since you were a breeder.

But the breeding industry, yes, even the "responsible" breeding industry has gotten very ugly and very greedy over the past years.

And they are supporting some terrible things.

The reason that they support Nathan Winograd is that he opposes rules and laws that they don't like, leading to the "anarchy" in animal control that you have criticized.

Breeders decided that they want no laws at all for breeders, even if it hurts the animals.

This is why the numbers of breeders at Winograd's conventions are growing, why the breeders are pushing him in places like Austin.

The breeders want no laws for breeders.

Winograd will support that.

And dogs suffer because of that.

But they don't care.

There are breed clubs across the nation that are supporting the mills, the dogfighters by opposing every law that comes up that could deal with these issues.

(There are a few exception breed clubs that support such laws, but they are mocked and harassed by the other ones)

Things like MSN. Do you know how much breeder lobbies are spending to oppose MSN? Just because it means they have to get licensed.

Breeder lobbies like Petpac, that oppose puppy mill regulations and other anti-cruelty laws. Well, Winograd is now working with them.

The problem is not purebred dogs. It is BREEDERS and the BREEDER LOBBY in this country, that has deteriorated into supporting cruelty.

Most people like Mr Mastiff here have no idea that the breeders they bought their dogs from are opposing the very anti-cruelty laws Mr Mastiff would support.

Are opposing laws that could make things better for mastiffs and other dogs.

Things have changed a lot since you were breeding, happy camper.

And lashing out at someone who is pointing out these changes, and blaming them for anything handy, doesn't do one bit of good.

Winograd is being primarily supported by the breeders at this point. Think about why that is.

Anonymous said...

A very interesting page on the AKC puppy mill links.

http://terriermandotcom.blogspot.com/2008/02/akc-loves-puppy-mills-and-naive.html

Like it or not, this is what the AKC has become, and what it gets its "responsible" breeders to support.

Like I said, a LOT has changed.

Anonymous said...

The breeders also love that Winograd is slamming other humane groups for them. Look at what Winograd writes about these other humane groups. They are the same kinds of smear that the breeding lobbies have been spreading around for some time, against groups like HSUS because HSUS supports things like puppy mill regulations.

Again, this is not just the "puppy mill people" spreading this smear. It is the "responsible" breeders doing this!

And it doesn't take much digging to figure out why.

When Winograd started out, his support was the humane community. As time went on, and people in the humane community saw the negative things in Winograd's plan, he lost their support (except for some extremists here and there.)

So Winograd has tried to expand his activity, he joined with the breeder community who uses him for their own needs.

The majority of the breeding community does not care about dogs getting euthanized (except for maybe their own breed, but then there are a lot of purebreds getting euthanized so?.)

They do not care about overpopulation, in fact, they say it doesn't exist, and Nathan Winograd took that breeder propaganda and now uses it.

They want taxpayers to set up spay neuter programs to pay to spay and neuter unaltered dogs they are selling, or descendants of them.

The breeders just want Winograd to get his people into animal control and oppose laws they don't like, influence local governments to refuse to enact laws like MSN, drop cruelty investigations (which often hit breeders), oppose pet limit laws (which make it harder for breeders) and so on.

Again, you only have to look at the makeup of his conventions. More and more breeder lobbyists and people as time goes on.

Plus he is working with more and more breeder lobbies, like PetPac.

Look in the areas where he is getting pushed. It is breeder groups pushing for him.

They don't care about the flaws in the Winograd no kill. They are only interested in getting their own agendas in there.

It's happening, it's real, and looking the other way just because they are breeders only means that more animals will suffer in these no kill traps.

Honesty Helps said...

Let me see what we can do here. First I think that there is a misunderstanding about comments on breeding. I don't want to see breeders go away, I just want to see them become more responsible and own their connection to the pet overpopulation problem.

Breeding began as a means to solve problems for humans. We needed dogs with a herding instinct or guarding instinct, so the best of the best were bred. We made these breeds, each with their own purpose. We still need that.

I think what is being missed on these comments is that we ALL, want to stop breeding that hurts the purebreds and hurts the shelters. Backyard, hobby and puppy mills are wrong yet the kennel clubs continue to condone these by issuing "papers". If the kennel clubs would follow the UK's example and only issue papers for puppies bred from winning dogs then it would make a difference hopefully. If anyone has another opinion, I would like to hear it.

We're getting upset because we feel that the generalization of all breeders is wrong. I agree with that. Although I will have to say that I have yet to meet what I would call a "responsible" breeder, one who alters prior to sale of pet quality dogs. I do not believe in contracts. Although a deposit is usually taken, the buyer can make a lot more money if they breed, so they don't care about the deposit.

So personally, I am not against purebreds and would be very upset at the thought of doing away with purebreds. I am guilty of generalizing myself and I realize that is wrong. I'm quite sure there are good, responsible breeders out there who are owning their part of the problem and trying to do something about it.

So guys, lets try to reach an understanding here of which breeders we are talking about. I have friends who have bred in the past but now work hard to stop the backyard breeding and puppy mills. We have to welcome them into the fold and not make them feel like we are referring to them. They have a lot to offer and I am willing to take it.

Anonymous said...

I have to emphasize again

The problem is not purebred dogs. It is BREEDERS and the BREEDER LOBBY in this country, that has deteriorated into supporting cruelty.

If you look at what so many of these "responsible" breeders are lobbying for and against, the dogs are not coming first.

Happy Camper said...

I had written a lengthy comment addressing this earlier and perhaps closed the page with out hitting " publish" so long as anon C continues to bash breeders he is not going to be a part of the solution. Helllllloooooo.talking trash is not part of a winning strategy. Some of what anon says makes sense then he goes off on these stupid unprovable manifestos that just tick people off. That is why Oreo's and Greta's readers stopped commenting here. No body wants to be associated with radicals, no matter whose side they are on. I want to comment on Anon C's personal interest in me, I don't think of lmyself as an " older person" so why do you ? I don't believe I am out of touch with
"modern breeders", breeders have worked for the betterment of a healthy specific breed standard to allow the dog to live happily in its genetic field. That has not changed in 300 years, other people just make puppies. Clearly the anon in this case knows jack zip about breeders versus " dog manufactuers and doesn't care to learn. We have thousands of laws on thousands of books, that if they were enforced would be a big start is shutting some of these places down. focus your energy on the assholes and learn which ones they are. The enemy here is the NO KILL plan as it is being presented by Winograd, when he can send the village idiots off in all directions he is happy.... So long as everybody fights each other nobody fights him.

Honesty Helps said...

Okay folks, we're getting a little carried away and definitely off the subject of the original post.

I want to post any and all comments on this blog and open them for discussion, whether we agree with them or not. I want my blog to be a learning tool for anyone interested.Learning means listening to any and all opinions in my book. But Happy Camper made a distinction that I will incorporate and that is "dog manufacturers". I feel that is a much better description of the breeders we all hate. Hopefully, this term will now be used instead of the general term of "breeders". As I have stated before, I have no problems with breeding purebreds just that it has gotten out of hand and the kennel clubs don't own their roles in all of it. But I certainly feel there has to be responsible breeders out there and they are probably on our side. So, guys, lets use the term "dog manufacturers" so there is no more misunderstanding on who we dislike.

Honesty Helps said...

I just received three anon comments that I am having trouble deciding to post. I understand the anger expressed, most certainly do but this anger might push away people who have a great deal to contribute and I prefer not to do that.

No one is running this blog but me and at this particular time I have to be careful. I can't share why with you, my blogger friends, but if I am able to pull this off, you will be cheering. If not, then we're back to square one. Please sit tight, let's accept to agree to disagree. And Anon, please continue to send me comments, just tone them down a bit because they could hurt what I am trying to do right now. Hope to have good news for you all soon.