L.A. Unleashed

All things animal in Southern
California and beyond

« Previous Post | L.A. Unleashed Home | Next Post »

Tea Partiers barking mad over puppy-mill humane measure in Missouri


The state of Missouri is known throughout the humane community as "puppy mill central," a state which by some reckonings is home to nearly a third of the nation's wretched breeding factories that churn out litter after litter of puppies that can be high-priced and sometimes less than healthy, from mothers that are kept like brood sows and wind up exhausted and ailing after delivering endless litters -- I know; I've adopted one or two of such poor exploited ladies.

Dog-loving groups have been hopeful that Missouri's Prop. B, the Puppy Mill Cruelty Prevention Act, would help to put a stop to some of this, by requiring commercial breeders with more than 10 breeding females who produce puppies for the pet trade give those dogs clean facilities, enough food and water and exercise, and what I would call decent intervals between pregnancies.

Simple, right?

Well, not according to some. As reported on Talking Points Memo, Tea Partiers are claiming that this is a manifestation of the Humane Society's sinister plan. Some, including people who either can't read or won't read -- to paraphrase Mark Twain, the latter has the same disadvantage as the former -- are applying Tea Party politics to this, declaring that the Missouri measure saving animals from misery and exploitation is part of a "radical" agenda.

The group calls itself the Alliance for Truth -- don't you love the grandiose labels these groups bestow on themselves? -- and one member, astonishingly, told the TPM site that Prop. B supporters "don't like animals."

Now, let's figure this one out. Who doesn't like animals? The Humane Society, with a decades-long track record of trying to give animals healthy and safe living conditions, or the people who seized on this, either with deliberate, cynical political intent or by a misreading of the law, to cast Prop. B as another effort by traitors and socialists to destroy the American way of life, which way of life also evidently includes the right to destroying animals' lives and health if that's what some red-blooded real American wants to do. What does the Alliance for Truth think about dog fighting? Maybe Michael Vick can show up at the next rally, so long as it doesn't interfere with his NFL schedule.

JoeThePlumber Overlaying the tragicomedy of this is the involvement of not-Joe-and-not-a-registered-Plumber, the supposed Everyman of the John McCain presidential campaign. Here's what he wrote: that the Humane Society is "cowardly [sic] hiding behind animal cruelty, lying to our citizens and taking our constitutional rights away -- one state at a time."

Today, humane conditions in puppy mills -- tomorrow, ending states' rights!

Come on, 'fess up, Comedy Central -- did you sneak a plant into Missouri and start up this group just to gin up good material for your writers?

Another of this group's contentions is that the Humane Society's real goal is "making it more difficult for middle-class American families to be dog owners."

Do I laugh or cry at that one, or both? Humane organizations would love for every middle-class American family to be a dog owner, and there's a really easy way, a cheap way, to make that happen -- without having to pay the hundreds or even thousands of dollars that puppy mills can charge per pet.

Millions of American-born dogs are waiting for you -- to live with your middle-class American family -- in shelters and with rescue groups all across America. There's just about any breed you want, any age, either gender, and all the all-American mutts you could hope for. None of your fancy hundreds or thousands-of-dollar price tags, either. Most shelters, you can walk out with the canine of your dreams for a hundred bucks or so, sometimes less.

In as you folks in the Show-Me State know, that's a demonstrable bargain.

Pennsylvania's Main Line Animal Rescue takes on puppy mills, one dog at a time
A tale of two litters

-- Patt Morrison

Top photo: Pomeranian puppies that were rescued from an alleged puppy mill operation in Dana Point, Calif. Credit: Marc Martin / Los Angeles Times

Bottom photo: Samuel Wurzelbacher, also known as Joe the Plumber, speaks during a "tax day tea party" protest in 2009. Credit: Al Goldis / Associated Press

Comments () | Archives (51)

The comments to this entry are closed.

I've read it many many times and I honestly cannot understand why anyone would oppose it. As an animal disaster rescuer, we've all had different feelings about the "big groups" at one time or another for various reasons.

But I just can't see how HSUS has it wrong on this one.

The argument I keep hearing is "next they'll take your cattle and pigs." Huh?

I don't think that is the "radical" plan and it wouldn't pass in Missouri anyway.
Why is everything politicized?

Everyone who opposes this should have to shadow a rescue group while they are saving pups from a puppy mill. The first time you see it, you can't believe it. It's sad what people do to make money.

In Missouri, tens of thousands of breeding dogs are forced to live in cramped, barren wire cages for years on end. These dogs often don’t have the basics of clean food and water, shelter from the blistering heat or bitter cold, regular veterinary care or exercise outside their cages. They never get their tummies rubbed or their ears scratched, and may never even know what it feels like to have grass beneath their feet.

After being bred again and again, sometimes until their uteruses literally “prolapse” or protrude from their bodies, they are often quickly discarded or killed when they can no longer turn a profit for their owners. Puppy mill owners often kill these dogs themselves to save on veterinary bills.

The puppies are shipped to pet shops across the country or sold directly over the internet to unsuspecting families who have no idea how the dogs are being treated.

Prop B will require puppy mills to provide each breeding dog under their care with the basics of humane care, including sufficient food, water, shelter from the elements, veterinary care and exercise. If you think that’s not too much to ask for man’s best friend, you should vote YES! on Prop B. For more information, including the language of the proposed measure, please visit YesOnPropB.com.

Pat, I used to live in Missouri. The Humane Society there can't possibly keep up with the wreckage wrought by unfeeling humans. But they try, and we supported them.

As I think you must know, it's not that Teabaggers oppose kindness to animals. It's that they want to raise a fuss and a distraction about everything except tax reduction and the impotent rages of left-behind white Americans who refuse to adapt to present conditions.

Keep in mind too that mass-breeders and puppy mill operators actively fight any attempts to cut into their big profits at the cost of thousands of dogs' lives. Hence, they inevitably descend on the comments section of any online story regarding their animal abuse (and will no doubt be here any minute) spewing the exact same falsehoods: "The Humane Society wants to take away your pets" etc. etc. They never admit they're breeders; they use names like "LibertyGuy" or whatever to imply that they have no personal stake in the issue, they just want to fight for the rights of all Americans to abuse animals in peace.

Not only is it a short leap from that kind of tactic to infiltrating the "Tea Party," it wouldn't be surprising to find that they are already members of the "Tea Party." It's not exactly a movement (insofar as it is a movement, rather than an astroturf group dreamed up by billionaires Richard Mellon Scaife and Charles and David Koch) that is predicated on moral ideals.

But I may be wrong. Maybe the people who are so outraged have in fact never seen what a puppy mill is really like. If so, I would gladly be there when they go on a tour of a puppy mill, to see dogs living their entire short, unloved lives in filthy cages, their paws being destroyed by the wire cage floors, no baths and no vet care, until their overworked reproductive systems give out and they're killed or dumped on a roadside.

I would very much like to see the face of a Tea Partier who visits a puppy mill for the first time and who can then turn around and say, "This is fine. We need to protect people's right to continue to do this to animals."

These people should fly back to Ferenginar where they belong... and where they'll go when a Republican president is elected. They materialized the moment Obama was swept into office and they'll vanish the second he leaves. Count on it. Seriously, protecting puppy mills in the name of American freedom? How repulsively self-serving can you possibly get?

The agricultural industries in Missouri are the main opponents and they have reached out to the teabaggers for support. They are against is adding caps to the number of animals and see this law as opening the door to regulating food livestock. In other words, they see this as industry regulation, something both groups oppose. They are not interested in animal welfare as much as they are about profits and limiting government interference. Both groups are reaching out to scores of Missourians telling them that this is another example of the government limiting freedom, will drive millions of dollars out of Missouri, more lost jobs and will ultimately lead to a loss of farms and farmers. However, the language of the bill clearly addresses only dogs, but anything to scare the masses.

One more reason to know how nuts the "Tea Party" members are They would make good "Storm Troupers" just give them a chance

right wing ideologues - how do puppies threaten a country like the UnitedStates?

This country becomes more pathetic by the day.

Let me quote PTBarnum "no-one ever lost money betting on the stupidity of the american people" !

This is so typical of tea bag style beliefs that I wonder if it really rates as news. Of course everyone knows that the Humane Society is just another arm of a vast conspiracy directed by the ACLU. The tea bags are just belaboring the obvious.

Support the Tea Party we are against anything! If you want lower taxes we want none. If you want to save animals we do not. If you are for freedom of speech we want to quash the rules. If you want fairness and equal rights for all people we want to exclude some that do not meet our list, you know, gays, blacks, Hispanics, and any free thinkers.
We want to make sure that you live by our twisted ideas of how things should be and if you do not agree then we will destroy you.

First who is using grandiose titles and misinformation to promote their agenda. Missouri already has the best animal welfare laws in the country. Proposition B side by side with the present Missouri laws does its best to reduce the care of animals. Missouri laws says animals must be fed twice a day. Proposition B says once a day is enough. Missouri law says animals must see a vet twice a year and immediately if any injury is apparent. Proposition B says only once a year to the vet is allowed. Proposition B states despite age all dogs must have unfettered access to the outside despite the temperatures which can get below freezing. Missouri laws say all dogs must be exercised properly and not subjected to wet, freezing, temperatures. This proposition B most egregious error is that all dogs despite their age must be kept in temperatures between 45 and 85 degrees. Missouri Law says all newborn puppies must be kept at 92% which is the temperature necessary for their survival. This law is badly written and HSUS knows it. Daily HSUS keeps increasing the number of kennels in Missouri by lying. They also said they did the intake and raids on kennels that had already decided to close their doors due to the age of the owners. HSUS did not force the closures they were normal closures due to the laws of Missouri. For nearly five years now HSUS has with impunity lied to the public and spread slander about Missouri kennels knowing full well that the USDA and Missouri inspect and regulate these kennels regularly. Proposition B does not do one thing to remove illegal or substandard puppy mills. What it does do is make owning more than ten female intact dogs a commercial venture which is about numbers not substandard care. This means home raised dogs have to be cared for with the excessive requirements that would turn a home and yard into an industrial complex just to raise your high quality puppies. That is why responsible breeders and dog owners object to this really stupid law which in court the supporters of Proposition B agreed it was a badly written overly vague and generally bad law. This is not about raising healthy quality puppies it is about removing responsible breeders from the land. Otherwise why were numbers added as they have no effect on the care animals receive. As for HSUS they have lied to the public again and again about Missouri, their laws and their dogs. This whole puppy mill idea and term came from HSUS. They first called Ohio the puppy mill capital, then Pennsylvania, then Illinois, all the while spreading lies about every state and every dog breeder. Why would anyone listen to a man who kills 146 puppies and publicly states he has no affinity for any animal and was surprised that dogs are malleable and their breeding does not determine their personalities. This man is a danger to our country, to our food supply and to our future to own pets.

the "humane" society doesn't have a decades long record of anything but raising money. they put less than one half of one percent of their budget last year into actually helping animals while the top execs get millions in pay packages.

they call the state I live in "puppy mill central" too, when they think it will help raise money here.

if there is real evidence of ill treatment, then that is already actionable, no new laws are needed! it's none of your or the government's business whether someone wants to keep 2 breeding females or 20.

the goal of many of the animal RIGHTS groups is to ultimately eliminate all pet ownership and they are attempting to incrementally advance that position every chance they get. for some they're just bleeding hearts, but mostly it's about controlling other people's lives and collecting millions doing it.

I dont think that you should be commenting on this of which you know nothing.. You are not in this state nor apparently, have you done any REAL research into the background of these groups and their TOP DOGS.. Sayre, Pacelle.. Have you researched their past jobs times, commentary on their "likeness into their vegan agendas".. Statements regarding animals.. Or for instance.. have you researched the past "fraudulent donation campaing tactics" used by the HSUS that are not under investigation.. Have you researched PETAS connection to these groups? Have you researched PETAs KILL RATES? .. Have you researched the HSUS and ASPCAs "Puppy mill raid tactics where they have for decades stolen farmers animals only to send them to High rate kill shelters like KERN COUNTRY, Atlanta HS (Georgia has the highest kill rate per capita in the United states a 3 x kill rate of over any other state... Why don't you do a little research before you back groups that it is QUITE apparent that you know absolutely nothing about? Some of these links are "common" thoughout the series of links listed but MAYBE you will check them out before your make false assumptions and do "bad reporting".. http://tl.gd/5v7q7v



IF you even have the deceny to post this.. I know you "moderate" things and you don't want to look back to your readers....

"The Humane Society, with a decades-long track record of trying to give animals healthy and safe living conditions"
Excuse me? The HSUS is an organization that raises millions of dollars for executive salaries and pension plans and lobbyists, who work to shove through legislation that incrementally will lead us to NO animals. Less than half of one percent of funds goes to help shelter animals. They are not affiliated with, nor support, any shelters. Oh yeah, one horse sanctuary. Their agenda which can be found easily online is to abolish all animal ownership and use. ALL. Including your pets. Commercial breeding kennels are already regulated. There are problems with not enough inspectors and not enough enforcement. THAT is the problem, and the proposition does not address that, only forced more regulations on ALL breeders that are meant to drive them out of the breeding business. That includes home hobby kennels! You don't need more laws, you need inspection and enforcement. What's not to get about that? Lastly, HSUS and these Animal Rights extremists do not like animals. They seize animals on reids and kill them; I guess they are better off dead, that's a real rescue don't you think? Turning mink loose that can't fend for themselves and upset the natural environment sounds really 'humane'. Letting the deer population grow to such sizes that humans and deer are dying on our roads is really humane. Letting bear populations grow to the point where they are invading homes and pose a threat to humans is really humane. Who care if what HSUS does is not humane to the human animal, as long as they are making millions, they are laughing all the way to the bank. WAKE UP AMERICA!

One final point - why is it that the puppies seized from these so-called puppy mills become absolutely wonderful pets when the shelters get their hands on them and sell them? Think about it.

I AM A MISSIOURIAN, I VOTE, I WILL BE VOTING NO ON PROP B.Why you ask? because Prop B as written will take away protection to as much as 50 percent of the dogs in MIssouri. Presently we have laws on the books against curelty and negelct that cover ALL dogs, the proposed Prop B will exclude ALL HUNTING DOGS.


WE do not need an organization from Washington DC run by a man from Connecticut who by the way has said publicly that he feels "no affinity for any non human creature" telling us what we need or how to do things.

If the HSUS rreally wants to help, send some of the 2+million dollars raised for advertising on helping animals in Missouri, help us hire 10 more inspectors and pay their salary.

Pat Morrison mentions she's "adopted one or two of such poor exploited ladies" right after mentioning they are exhausted and ailing after breeding so many litters. Well i guess they are not that exhausted or ailing if she can't tell if she has had one or two. Either that or she has such a poor memory she can't remember. Really, does anyone lose track of how many dogs they've had? I would never say i've had "one or two" of any kind of dog- i've had five, three died a while ago so i've got exactly two right now. not "one or two". If Ms. Morrison can't get it straight on how many dogs shes had how can i trust what she writes?

One things for sure... Ive found that groups like you...The LA times are very one sided in allowing the commentary.. Maybe you have some agenda also as to why you do not want the truth out.. Maybe this should be addressed in our next topic.. Seems to me that to be a GOOD reporting agency you have to report in an UNBIASED manner.. You have to report FACTS and not be one-sided writing "stories" and "commentary" of which it is apparent you know pretty much nothing.. THAT much is apparent by the way that you addressed this story. You have no factual information in this "story".. Thats all you can call it is a "story" because there is not PERTINENT information to back up your lies and accusations as to what is really happening in your "defense" of these groups. Its guite apparent that you haven't done ANY homework at all on this one. It is quite apparenty that neither you, your newspaper or "cheif editor" has the ability to print pertinent and RELIABLE information.. If you don't see the relevance (if you ever take the time to research Peta, HSUS, ASPCA, Pacelle, Sayre, past relationships, statements of "veganistic agenda") then its quite apparent that you care nothing at all about the farming industry that you are slandering and are so adimately fighting against.. DO YOUR HOMEWORK FIRST before you print hate, ignorance and onesided unfounded and argumentative information.. I guess thats what brings in the readers.. Its not that you care who you hurt...Its the headlines that bring in the readers, no matter how onesided and ignorant these "stories" are..

LASTLY MY REPONSE TO THE L.A. TIMES IGNORANCE.. Now running under topics in Missouri Newspapers and will be ran in over a dozen others venues before todays end..

The LA times has never been anything but onesided on every story they have printed and nearly everyone I have found was PRO PETA HSUS AND ASPCA... They have continually praised the efforts of the HSUS ASPCA and PETA all three really.. They've never been anything but biased.. Apparenty there are no meat eaters or farmers in their families either. Its sad when the L.A. times has to resort to rhetoric like this to print stories without even investigating the facts.. They are what I refer to as "re-run printers". Its apparent by the article to which you are refering that they have not done any real research on this subject nor do they know anything about animals or the farming industry as a whole. They are just printing a slanderous headline to sell papers.. How can a NEWSPAPER be so biased and onesided on a subject that they have no background in nor APPARENTLY have any REAL information about. Did you see any PERTINET, informative, INFORMATION BACKED links in their "story"? Nope. Because they know NOTHING about what is going on with the farming industry and laws in this state... What a crock.. All I took from that article was "another slanderous headline" against the farming industry.. What will you people eat when you put these farms out of business? Even the legislators in the State of Missouri are standing up against this legislation. MOST veterinarians are even PUBLICLY against this legislation stating things like it will do nothing but hurt the farming industy in this state... Even Schwartzenageer in California VETOED almost identical legislation.. Doesn't that tell you people anything?

Well first of all "Sick" Vick would no show up at a an Oppose Prop B .. why ?because he works for you so called "Humane Society" > They support him and his so called "rehabilitation" They tout him as 'reformed". They actually let him talk to children about his acts.. and how "sorry" he is and you know what .. Dog fighting is up up up in the places where he speaks..
Second, Prop B is a shill.. a bill that does m=nothing that is not already done in in Missouri.. Did you know that Prop B calls for dogs to be fed "once every 24 hours' while the current law calls for every 12 hours? Which is better?
Prop B will do nothing to curb underground operations ( which are about 99% of the raids). In fact Prop B will make conditions worse for underground dogs.. They will have LESS vet care.. LESS food and water.. and LESS room to run around.. but what they will really have less of is vaccinations whih will of course raise the disease rate among all dogs..
Your lack of knowledge about animal husbandry is showing.. animals do not need a "rest " between breedings.. in fact it is dangerous to allow a bitch to lie fallow. Experts say that bitches should be breed when mature ( depends on breed) and bred consecutively and then spayed.. FOR THEIR HEALTH.
As for hundreds of dollars for a dogs?/ Most shelters charge at least 400 for puppy..and they get the dogs for FREE.. not bad ..
Where are your pictures of the "pit bulls'? those are the dogs most found at shelters.. and "shelters" kill most of them.. I don't see you promoting the "adoption" of "pit bulls".. How come?
Your city is the worst.. mandatory castration laws that have driven up shelter ( and I use the word loosely) killings.. Pet limit laws that restrict good owners from owning more pets ( anyone who owns "too many" is called a hoarder). Thankfully your new head of ACO is trying to stop this stupid law and allow for more pets.. BUT she is actually being fought on this issue.. by whom?? BY supposed dog lovers.
You are not telling the truth here ( but then who needs the truth when you are publishing a newspaper)
All of the items in Prop B are already covered in the current laws in Missouri EXCEPT for the number of animals a person can keep.. Pet limits are built in to this travesty called a proposition.. As with most thing.. if the laws were enforced they would be sufficient.. but I don;t see the HSUS pushing for enforcement or donating some of their donors money to pay for it..
To I don;t get it.. you sure don;t.. if dogs are first.. chickens and cattle WILL be next.. the HSUS already has pushed the egg production industry out of CA.. they will not be happy with "just dogs'..
Anne.. please prove your statements like "often" and "sometimes'.. with real stats...
I am about as far from a "Tea partier" as you can get.. and yet I know that when a law is already in place it needs to be ENFORCED and no new band aid will help..

there aren't 10,000 breeding dogs in THE WHOLE COUNTRY!

HSUS is wrong on this one

their agenda - "til there ARE no more" - and that means pets in the home

and YES they have started in on the farmers.........

do your research people

This is HSUS vision for all animals. I suppose they will head the New Offices?


New Offices
Animal Protection Liaison in White House – appoint an Animal Protection Liaison in the White House, similar to the new position announced for Carol Browner and/or the Council on Environmental Quality, to help coordinate animal protection concerns (policy issues, legislation, and regulations affecting animals cut across several different agencies – Agriculture, Interior, Commerce, EPA, HHS, State, Transportation, HUD, DOD, FTC, Education, etc.)

Animal Protection Division in the Justice Department – appoint an additional Assistant U.S. Attorney to head a new Animal Protection Division in the Justice Department, similar to the Civil Rights Division, to ensure strong enforcement of federal animal protection law.

What gets me is that when 99 percent of you people who post your oppostion against breeders and farms make your uninformed comments, its sounds like you are quoting DIRECTLY from the HSUS and ASPCA handbook.. None of you KNOW ANYTHING from first hand knowledge of working on a farm, raising animals or even caring for more than your own pet.. None of you have researched the HSUS PETA or ASPCA, their financials, their CEO's, their holdings, their past agendas, their statements about farming and animals, their stock ownership in corporations /meat plants that they are "trying to buy out of business".. You haven't looked in to Edwin Sayres, Pacelles and many of their past CEOS and execs history and past jobs where some of them have worked for two or all three of these VEGAN agenda groups.. WOW.. And you dare to comment and back things when you know absolutely nothing about EITHER side of the argument.. Some of you should try to go to work on a farm JUST FOR ONE DAY.. I GUARANTEE you at the end of the day you will have a new appreciation for what these farmers do.. You would then take the time to research the agendas of these groups before you allow yourselves to "unwittingly" back and support these groups without at least trying to research their motives.. Sayre and Pacelle both have made it just as clear as PETA has that they have "no love" for the animal industries in this country.. Do you people really not care even enough to look into these peoples background before you form your opinions on onesided, biased and slanderous information.. I BELIEVE THAT IT IS TIME FOR A LAWSUIT.. It is time for the farmers and meat industry ban together and file a federal lawsuit against the HSUS ASPCA and PETA for slander and defamation of the farming, breeding and other industries involved as a whole.. I believe that the #nokill rescue groups in this country who have of late been under continual attack by these groups need to be included in this lawsuit.. I also believe that any of these other groups who have continually allowed and particiated in this defamation while backing these laws and defamation should also be included in this suit. Our legislators have a sworn duty to protect our factory, farming and other viable industries from this on slaught of attacks.. I GUARANTEE you there are plenty of attornies in this nation whose families are from these states and have a farming background who would LOVE to participate in shutting down these vegan backed groups who are assaulting our farms and breeders. Its time to stand up people.. Its time for ALL states, farmers, breeders and rescues who have been under continual attack for years by these groups to stand up, ban together to put a stop to this onslaught, slander and intentional infliction of finacial stress that has been caused by these assaults over the years.. GOD BLESS AMERICA , OUR FARMS, OUR BREEDERS and any other viable industries who are working to feed, clothe and working for progress. FARMING FAMILIES, breeders and other industries under attack you are needed now more than ever.. The farmers who are the real backbone of this country need you now more than ever!

If anyone can not read. I would strongly suggest it is the author of this ignorant article. Missouri already has laws for breeders to supply clean food and water, vet care, space and exercise programs. People like the person who wrote this article. Are reacting out of emotions sparked by those who bank on it that, the reader do not read preexisting laws. Prop B is unconstitutional. It was badly written it will solve zilch, nada. On this web site it shows the two laws side by side for those who do not wish to read the pre existing law which is 22 pages long. No wonder LA has so much problems. Your reporters write things without even reviewing what the truth may be. Wake Up LA . The rest of the country laughs at you

Why does Joe and the Tea Party hate puppies when all they want to do is love? Choose Team Puppy: http://www.facebook.com/pages/Puppies/123257581062840

As you can see, the pro-puppy mill people have found your article.

Have they said in comments about how this bill is about killing dogs?

Did they come in with the "first it's the dogs, next it's our chickens!" yet?

There's dozens of lies, innuendos, and smears -- sometimes it makes you sick to read them.

This is really about business to these people. Large scale factory dog farms are such a money maker. And hardly any work, either. Just throw some females into cages and breed her until she's broke. Then toss her out and start with a new dog.

I'd like to say that these types of people are not what Missouri is about. There are thousands who signed the petition to put this bill on the ballot; churches, businesses, veterinarians, animal rescue organizations, and others who are for this bill.

I guess we'll see what we show the world about Missouri come November. I hope we show the world that this is a state that cares about dogs.

I love how being pro-liberty, anti-government intrusion = pro-puppy mill in these animal rights extremists' minds.

I own (yes that's right OWN) 12 pets, I have not bred any in more than 8 years and sold about five dogs ever in my life. But whether they are fixed or not or anything else is really no one else's business, and the government certainly does not bel0ng in the business of checking on such things.

there are already laws protecting animals, use them, we don't need any more! lawmakers ought to be busy working at creating jobs and helping schools and the economy and stay out of our backyards!

Ah, yes, HSUS, under investigation by the IRS, a defendant in a RICO suit filed against them and a number of other "humane" groups. $100 million budget, nearly 50% spent on raising more money, 5% spent on salaries and retirement funds, less than 0.5% spent on actually helping animals. $35 million raised to help animals affected by Katrina, $7 million spent doing that, and only under duress, a threat of legal action from the attorney general of Louisiana. Most of the money spent lobbying for laws that take constitutional rights away from animal owners. What a group!

They have spent more than $1.25 million on the campaign to enact Prop B in Missouri, money listed as coming from out of state.

The true agenda of HSUS is to end all animal ownership. Their CEO ha said, ". . . One generation and out. . . ." when talking about mandatory spay and neuter programs they want to have all localities pass and enforce.

Look at what Prop 2 did in California, oh, that's your state, with the egg producers. One of the farmers spent millions to build new hen houses to meet what was thought to be the directions in Prop 2, and HSUS comes back and says that is not good enough. The chickens can not be caged, they need to be free range. Terrific. According to scientific studies, this means fewer eggs, higher prices, higher labor costs for the farmer, more disease among the chickens and humans by conditions that will be prevalent in the barns. What a deal.

You want more information about the goals and aims of HSUS and how they run their business? Check out http://www.humanewatch.org. HSUS, for those I am sure will chime in, so you will see the arguments first hand, has yet to refute anything that Humane Watch has published. Instead they spend their time disparaging the head of the group, and the possible money sources that contribute to the group. That is a pretty good sign that what they say is accurate.

Some one has already mentioned http://www.hslf.org/pdfs/agency-issues-recommendations_2009.pdf for the document found there. This should give you a bit of an idea of how they are going to achieve their goals.

Question the statistics they use. I have yet to find one that can be verified as being accurate. They say there are 3000 dog breeders in MO. I can only find about 1550 breeders who are registered with the state and/or the USDA in the state, and the number has been shrinking over the last 10 years or so. These breeders are subject to 3 inspections each year. One by the state, one by the USDA,and one by the AKC if their dogs are registered through the AKC. Where are the other 1500 breeders that HSUS claims. If they do exist, they will not be subject to this law. How can the state inspect something they do not know exists?

What about the claims that many are not paying sales taxes? Business to business transactions are not taxed. Transactions between the breeders and the general public are taxed. How does HSUS know this and the state's department of revenue or whatever that collection agency is called in MO? How did they come up with the $70,000 figure they toss around?

HSUS is not to be trusted and not to be believed.

As for Proposition b itself, on a cursory read, it does seem to be reasonable, but upon closer examination, the terms are very vague. They do limit the number of breeding dogs, which is set a a bare minimum for a good breeding operation, but far too low to have an excellent one. Good nutrition is not defined, and it is different at every life stage of a dog, and different for every breed. Who gets to define it? And it is just too easy to go on about it. HSUS has rigged the proposal in its favor, not yours and certainly not the breeders.

Yes, that's right - the MO breeders have been given their list of talking points, and that's what H Hunt et al are spewing in these emails.

I've taken in numerous puppy-mill breeding dogs over the past 20 years - the breeders get rid of them when they are about 6 years old and don't produce well any more. Maybe they sell them at auction, maybe they shoot them, maybe they let a rescue group have them. Doesn't really matter, as long as they no longer have to feed them - can't have costs exceeding the revenues, you know.

Currently I have a little shih-tzu that went crazy in her cage. I've had her over 3 years, and while she may never let me pet her without cringing, she has finally stopped running in circles most of her waking hours.

I've had contact with many of you, and you make me sick. I used to attend MO Pet Breeder Association meetings, and I can't describe how I dreaded spending time with a group composed of ignorant, selfish losers. I've seen your USDA records, and very few of you have 'clean' ones.

Get a real job, people, and stop making your living at the expense of these animals.

As you can tell, I'm angry. Trying to rebut the lies and distortions of people who can fight against measures giving animals enough room to stand, a solid floor to stand on, exercise and shelter gets to you after a while, and the animal welfare groups in MO have been fighting this battle for over 20 years - at least, that's how long I've been involved.

Prop B will pass, because the only people that believe the lies that the opponents are spreading are those that are as ignorant as they are, and MO is also home to people who are intelligent, compassionate, and/or who see the BS for what it is.

"...and what I would call decent intervals between pregnancies."

What veterinary background do you have to determine what is "decent"? Are you aware that most reproductive vets believe that in a normal, healthy dog it is actually best for the uterus if she is bred on consecutive seasons and then spayed, rather than spreading the breedings out? Laws that require "seasons off" are not only ignorant of the science but can be harmful to the dogs they purport to protect.

Just because I don't want to have a baby every nine months doesn't mean it's bad for a dog to do it. There's no feminism among dogs. They aren't offended at the term "barefoot and pregnant" and don't resent having to give up their careers to raise their children. Their self-esteem isn't affected by sagging teats and they don't have to worry about the budget allowing for multiple kids in diapers or day care. Stop the anthropomorphism!

Anne - Did you know that HSUS has 100's of employees that are paid with donated charity money at the expense of the animals? I heard they have more employees than the White House?

This is yet another reason that so many Americans question the motives and thinking of so-called "tea party" types. These people find something sinister behind everything. Tim McVey would have LOVED Tea Party folks. Their thinking is just like his. It's only a matter of time until one of them blows up a government building or kills a government official......all in the name of "taking back America", of course!

Wow, how right I was in predicting that the puppy millers would get their Google alerts and rush to slime this article.

There are too many lies here to de-bunk all of them. But one or two really must be addressed.

First, the humane laws that protect pets owned by individual owners do NOT protect dogs and puppies in puppy mills. Puppy mills are regulated by the USDA, and it is well-known that the few existing regulations are lax and rarely enforced. The USDA is not going to be there to stop a puppy miller from killing or dumping spent breeder dogs. They don't operate like that. And the few laws on the books to protect dogs in these facilities would make you sick. A breeder dog can legally spend her entire life in a cage with six inches clearance in front of her nose and six inches clearance in back. Additionally, if I abuse my dog there's at least a chance that a neighbor or passerby could see it and report it to agencies charged with stopping animal cruelty, which USDA is not. But puppy mills are notorious for keeping well-hidden so no one is who is not complicit in the enterprise even knows they're there, much less the conditions the dogs are being kept in.

Another absurd lie is that keeping dogs continually pregnant is somehow good for them Don't know where you cooked that craziness up, but it's as ridiculous as it sounds. I adopted a dog more than five years ago from the South LA shelter. She was used as a backyard breeder and kept continually pregnant, churning out Maltese puppies. The shelter vet estimated her age at the time to be fifteen. She was in such bad shape that, unexpectedly, the shelter immediately acceded to my request for a medical waiver for getting her spayed, because I thought it would just be too much for her. The shelter also required me to sign a veterinary waiver acknowledging that I knew her teeth were completely rotten and would require extensive vet care.

This year my vet estimated her age to be about eleven. That means when I got her, with a mouth full of rotted teeth, in a condition that led vets to believe she was a senior of fifteen, she was actually just six years old. Her teeth have all had to be removed, and when vets finally decided she was healthy enough to be spayed it was discovered that she had pyometra. She has had to have mammary tumors removed three times over the past five years. Pregnancy, as any human woman can tell you, is very hard on the body. And when you are kept continually pregnant in filthy conditions, when other veterinary issues such as injuries or infections are ignored, when no care or medication is given, and no relief from overcrowding, noise or variations in temperature -- the body is going to wear out sooner than later.

I don't think the people who spew these lies believe them, I think they believe they should be allowed to make money off of animals any way they want. I don't think their minds can be changed, because they have no love for dogs or compassion for the suffering of another living being. But my hope is that anyone who stumbles across this story, and who is just learning about humane issues, as we all have done, will pause and think before believing what these people write. As you see, someone can use the screen name "petlover" and have completely anti-humane views. Ask yourself: What makes sense? Is it possible that a facility that houses hundreds of dogs in small cages, that makes its profit off of every puppy born, can possibly have the best interests of each dog at heart? What happens to the puppy who can't be sold, due to even a minor "defect" like having a crooked tail? When puppies are commodities to be bought or sold like paper cups, what happens to the defective cups? What happens when the cup-making machine wears out?

And, bottom line, can the person who sees the every dog only in terms of profitability or loss be trusted to treat every dog, no matter what they look like, or their ability to breed, with decent humanity? What makes sense?

Have any of you ever gotten a GOOD dog from ANYONE? .. I hear you extremist post stories about "oh I got a dog with rotten teeth", oh this dog had a tumor.. In case you don't know it, dogs are JUST LIKE PEOPLE.. They get tumors, rotten teeth and all sorts of unforseen medical problems over their life span.. I have a Yorkie RIGHT now, that was given to because a person bought it, decided they didn't want it, and I recued it.. At 4 years old she had her first tooth problem.. by 7, TOOTHLESS.. Ask your vet.. A LOT of small dogs have teeth problems that cause their teeth to come out such as "double rowing".... I do rescues all the time also.. These vets will tell you just about anything you want to hear.. You go in with a sob story of "how you rescued this poor dog from a puppy mill" the FIRST thing you will hear is EVERY ailment the dogs has was a result of mistreatment in a puppy mill. Ive picked up COUNTLESS mutts off of the side of the road that were blind from disease, hairless from various skin ailments such as mange, allergies, you name it... YOu people make all kinds of ASSUMPTIONS because a dog came from someone that you know absolutely nothing about.. Ive spent more money feeding and caring for dogs over the years than most of you people spent on your own homes.. Ive seen it all.. If you think that these "PUPPY MILL DOGS" as you call them (which is not a supreme court defined term) are in any worse shape that most of the dogs roaming in my neighbors yard or than the mother and three babies I picked up off the side of the road, or the three dogs dumped over my gate two weeks ago, or the half dozen thrown out about three miles up the road that """I""" will have to pick up, then you are absolutely mistaken.. You people should REALLY look up the statitics on how many of these ABANDONED SHELTER DOGS come from breeders... NEARLY ZILCH in comparsion to the ones coming from IRRESPONSIBLE PET OWNERS.. You see, your PUPPY MILL stories are the ones that bring in all of the money and get people to donate.. You care nothing about the millions of dollars, apparently, that are being dumped off on the side of the road or people come by in the night and dump off on shelters..THAT number is the one we should be addresss...REMEMBER WHEN YOU ARE ROAMING THE INTERNET.. 85-90 PERCENT OF ALL DOGS ABANDONED AT SHELTERS are the product of IRRESPONSIBLE PET OWNERS.. I once did my own local survey of shelters asking them "how many dogs of the intake that you get each year come from breeders".. NEARLY EVERY ONE OF THEM STATE, "we rarely if ever get a dog from a breeder to our knowledge".. INFACT, they also stated that "most of the dogs the got come from individuals who didn't spay or neuter, let their dogs roam the street, they were too lazy or couldn't find homes for them, so they dropped them off at the shelter">> MOST of them will be euthanize.. TRY THAT on for size when you tell your hideous breeder lie stats.. The ASPCA and HSUS should be using our 100-200 million dollar a year donation money to address THAT problem.. If the would implement a spay and neuter program across America with all that money, have a FREE spay and neuter program, WE WOULD'NT EVEN HAVE AN ANIMAL OVER POPULATION PROBLEM.. Of course, IF they did that, THEY WOULD'NT HAVE A JOB WOULD THEY?

It is a well known fact that the founding fathers owned only malnourished, abused, and hobbled canines when they signed the legislation that made Amurrica the bestest country in the universe. Shelter dogs are for gay Muslim communists. U-S-A! U-S-A! U-S-A!


NO animal ownership; NO meat to eat;'
Government enforced National Vegetarianism!
No more pets!
No more pillows!
No more shoes!
No more sweaters!
No more Jello!

Holy Fidel!!!!!

Purina and Monsanto and Tyson's and McDonalds and Con-Agra AND Walmart AND Kraft and all the other MULTI-BILLION DOLLAR MULTINATIONAL GIANTS of the food industry plus OUR WAY OF LIFE and OUR FREEDOMS to be driven out of town badda bing by The Mighty Wayne Pacelle!!!

Sheer unadulterated madness!



I have attached the web address of an information table. This shows current Missouri Law and the proposal from HSUS. All the provisions for good kind treatment are already in place! The difference is $$$ and BIG publicity (donations) to HSUS as this progresses.
Again.....HSUS is only seeking publicity and $$$

H Hunt...seriously...lay off the Red Bull.

I have to kind of enjoy the fact that the pro-puppy millers, no matter how you try to conceal your identities, are completely unable to conceal your hand-quivering aggression. With every word you let us know who you really are.

That being said, how exactly do you imagine an animal control officer or shelter worker would be able to tell a dog came from what you call a "breeder" and what the reality-based world calls a puppy mill? They don't come with labels saying "Mass-bred in Missouri" (or Palmdale, for that matter). Are you trying to say that we're alleging puppy millers dump dogs directly at the shelter? No dear, we're stating as fact that they dump them on roadsides, or kill them themselves. They wouldn't waste the gas to bring them to a shelter. Maybe those are the dogs you say you find on the road.

BTW, your claim to be the world's biggest and best rescuer rings false to anyone who actually works in rescue. No genuine rescuer would EVER argue in favor of puppy mills. No genuine rescuer would defend bringing more dogs into a world where healthy, adoptable dogs are killed in shelters every day. No genuine rescuer could look at what happens to breeder dogs in puppy mills and not want every one to be closed that instant.

And finally, I never in any way implied that my dog was a "bad" dog. She's a great dog who has had way more than her share of health problems because for six years she was used as a puppy machine to make someone money, a person who never gave her even the most basic vet care. Nor did I say she was a puppy mill dog or breeder, I said she was used as a backyard breeder. I used her as an example of what happens to a dog who is kept constantly pregnant. And at the time her teeth and the first set of mammary tumors were removed I never told her vet that she was used as a backyard breeder, because at that time I didn't understand the issue.

However I do now. That's why I know not one word you write is credible. What is believable is your tone of irrational hostility. That is completely authentic.

The reason that it is so easy for YOU to argue with stupid is because quite apparently you are a lunacit..Read your own statement........ Littleblackdog and the statement above that comment WITH NO NAME, both sound like the commentary of a NUT! Ignorant opinions and statistics are made, in most cases, by people who do the least.. The people who are in favor of the passage of Propostion B in Missouri, for the most part, did not grown up on a farm nor will THEY PERSONALLY be affected by the passage of this law.. Thats why it is so easy for people who know NOTHING to comment. You make "unremarkable" comments about the "ignorance" or lack of education on the part of the people in the state of Missouri as if you THINK that you are a creature of a superior intellect. If only that were true.. I will put it to you like this.. WE still have our homes..We are the ones who are still working on our farms, in our shelters and caring for these animals.. MOST OF YOU self proclaimed intellectuals are the ones that are homeless and jobless right now.. "Try that on for smarts". And just as in times past, you will always run to others like farmers back to those "ignorant" people that you keep talking down toowhen you are homeless and starving.. This economy is getting tight.. Ive seen countless of these several hundred thousand dollar homes around me foreclosed on and abandoned as of late.. But the people, like a lot of my friends and their families who have farmed for decades and centuries to feed you,know their position and meaning in life and they STILL have a place to live.. THAT's what I call "inteligent"..

I hate the HSUS. But I hate puppymillers more. I rescue and rehab spent and discarded breeder dogs from commercial breeding operations in MO. I know, first hand, the conditions these dogs live in and the condition they're in when they're discarded. Missing body parts like feet and ears because they dropped through broken wire flooring and were bitten off by the canine shark in the cage below. So horribly matted and feces-covered you can't tell the nose end from the tail end until you shave them down. Stink so bad it makes you vomit. Skin-and-fur covered skeletons with broken jaws, no teeth, every parasite you can imagine and a few you can't. Inguinal hernias or tumors so large they drag on the ground when the dogs walk. Dogs unable to walk on solid ground, because they've never set foot on it in their lives. Dogs that spin endlessly, mindlessly in tiny circles because they've been confined all their lives - sometimes with 2-3 other dogs, in a space the size of the inside of your dishwasher. Dogs that are blind from congenital defects or untreated injuries/infections. Dogs on the verge of death due to anemia from severe flea and tick infestations. And those are just some the physical issues, the psychological damage is just as ugly and severe.

You can spout BS about how well your dogs are cared for until you're hoarse and your fingers fall off from fatigue, and I'll never believe a single word of it. I KNOW what you do to these dogs.

Vote YES on Proposition B!

Sigh, sigh, sigh. It just seems to not get any better. Puppymill breeders continue to have lobbyists in MO to continue their cruelty. Why do we need to continue this cruelty? I was recently in Europe. I am ashamed, embarrassed, and angry with the number of mills we have. The dogs in Europe don't even look like the inbred and sickly dogs we breed. We have so many inbred dogs now they are all impaired in some way. There are reputable breeders out there, but they are very few. If millers did not want this legislation, they should have patroled their own kennels for cruelty and the AKC should have stopped issuing papers to these inbred puppies. What surprises me is that people continue to buy from these millers through pet stores and the internet because they cannot wait for a well bred dog. A reputable breeder will only breed occasionally and breed for health and temperament and socialize their puppies. If you cannot wait for a well bred and adjusted dog, then do not get one. I want people to oppose this bill to go to a puppymill seizure once and then get back to us. My guess is all of the people complaining about their rights being violated are the puppymillers or people who are afraid to go to one of these mills. Once you have seen the animals coming out of these places, you will never be the same. So let us continue to breed and dogs continue to die. Do people realize the adults spend their whole (their whole lives) in these cramped cages on wires never touching the ground or having anyone hold them. What kind of puppies do you think you are going to produce with a dog who is stressed out beyond anyone's belief. One mill I went to the majority of the breeder dogs had holes in their gums from eating day old white bread all of their lives and living in a building you could not even walk through until you got to the back where the kennels were. It was beyond heartbreaking, this was a torture chamber. I really feel so much shame for this country in what we are doing to these dogs.

"The reason most people continue to buy from these millers" as you put it, is because they know that you are lying for the most part.. They, just as I , know that YES, there are SOME bad breeders, just as their are A LOT of crooked politicans, there are a lot of LYING, untrustworthy "rescue groups" who fraud for donantions, but thankfully, MOST people are intelligent enough to know that you don't punish the farming industry as a while because of the illicit behavior of the few.. They also know that the HSUS ASPCA and PETA all have an agenda and lie and would do ANYTHING to continue taking in 100-200MILLION BUCKS a year in donation money... Do you need more motive to lie and perpetrate fraud than that? I doubt it.. Thats why they lie like they do and paint the whole farming and breeding industry as a whole like some kind of animal abusing deiviants...Thats what makes you idiots keep donating billions and billions of dollars.. Its that simple.. If you don't care enough to look up the ASPCA PETA and HSUS finanicals, watch their "raids in action", see how many of these animals are sent to kill shelters, then you don't care enough to even be in this conversation.. After all, how do you call HSUS ASPCA and PETA a "rescue group" (and yes thats what they are SUPPOSED TO BE OR THEY WOULD'NT BE RAIDING PUPPY MILLS) How do you call them a rescue group when they are like about how many of these animals are killed, and more of these dogs end up DEAD because of THEM than are actually saved.. Thats one HELL OF A RESCUE... GO #nokill NATION!.. GO USGOV STOP THE FRAUD LYING AND KILLING... AND STOP the fraud being perpetrated upon our farms! TIme to do your job legislatiors, OBAMA, Time for the USGOV to step in, investigate this fraud and hold the HSUS ASPCA and PETA responsible for these billions of dollars a year that they have stolen from unwary donors who THOUGHT that they were "saving puppy mill dogs" when all this time they have been lying while causing death of MOST of these animals as a direct result of their actions... IF THAT AINT FRAUD NOTHING IS!

Great post petlover.

I own my dog, too, and will neuter only if I see fit. No one is going to force me to surgically mutilate my own dog just to force his body to function abnormally. In eight years he has never bred, never produced a litter of puppies, but if I wanted to allow him to that would be my business not H$U$ or anyone else's.

I am not going to sit next to his water dish waiting for the next hair to land in it just so I can jump up and refill it before some H$U$ thug kicks my door down and convicts me of animal cruelty.

Untrained dogs shouldn't be given free run of a home or their surroundings. They're more like kids in that respect. Who allows their children to come and go at will? For that matter who allows their dog to come and go at will?

Which brings me to my final point, all things being fair and equal under the U.S. Constitutional ban on the creation of second class citizens the H$U$ cannot legally sweet talk a bill into law that excludes themselves!

But for those of you who have no concept of freedom or respect for the determination and hell our Founding Fathers went through in the establishment of our fading Republic here is something to chew on. If this is going to pass let it only be because everyone must abide by the rules set forth therein; every pet owner, veterinarian, groomer, shelter worker, and H$U$ minion.

Don't worry it's only the basic standard of care you said. Nothing to fret about.

Why are you crying?

Here in Las Vegas there are an average of 136 pets a day turned into Lied animal shelter.
We euthanize 80 to 100 dogs a day.
I'll repeat that, We euthanize 80 to 100 dogs a day.
Where are all these dogs coming from? What is the cost to the taxpayers to intake, house, medically care, euthanize and dispose of these animals?
Perhaps puppy mills should micro chip their products and be responsible for the costs incurred when their products are returned to our shelters.

There really is a divide in this country, be it red state, blue state or humane animal treatment and cruelty. This disdain for government is amazing. As someone who has lived overseas and seen effective central government (France, Singapore), I ask what has all this decentralization/state/local rights gotten us? Poor education with no national standards, pockets of 1st world (Silicon Valley for example) but mostly states with 3rd world ones, etc.

How can anyone think this proposal will limit the right to have a dog? Ignorance is all I can come up with and a fear of anything related to government. Perhaps we should get rid of all government and disband the police/military who protect us. When you are the victim of a crime, don't call the police...government=bad. Those against this proposal should agree.

Perhaps we should not subsidize farming (Missouri is a farm state) or have federal tax transfers from wealthier states like New York to poorer ones like Missouri. These are done at the federal level. I'm sure New Yorkers would be happy to keep the tax money instead of having it used to pay for roads in the South, etc. I don't get the tea baggers and I don't get the puppymillers. And I am not a democrat nor Republican. I have voted for both (depending on the candidates) as I am an Independent. Funny thing about the tea baggers who don't like governmet...I bet they would be the first ones to federally ban abortions, federally ban gay marriage, and federally ban pornography. So much for states rights there. I wonder if they even know what tea bagging means :)

However, if Missouri and other states want to deal and profit from this misery, than perhaps other states should ban the sale of animals from these puppy mill states...or does that violate the inter-state commerce laws? Now you want federal government to function. Frankly, to those who say that this rule would ban having dogs (which it does not), I say maybe it should. Frankly, Americans (not just Americans) have done a terrible job at dog ownership and animal welfare in general, from animal neglect and abuse (setting kitties on fire, drowning dogs, chaining dogs, etc) to puppy mills and the oversupply/forced euthanasia of companion animals, etc. If you can't pay to spay/neuter and provide sanitary conditions, food, vet care, etc. you frankly have no business having a pet. Just like if you can't pass a drivers test, pay for car insurance, etc. you can't drive. Maybe there should be a test/license for pet ownership...that would drive the tea baggers and puppy millers nuts.

I haven't studied constitutional law is some time, but I never read that having pets (not to mention abusing them) is a constitutional right. Hell, there are more rules, regulations and fees in getting a drivers license and having a car, operating machinery, etc. than owning/caring for a defenseless animal. We as a society are sick. I have more faith in my dogs (all rescues) than I do people. No wonder this country is going down the drain.

What a bizarre world some of you live in.

The puppy mill apologists would like you to believe that regulating the hideous puppy mill industry is somehow bad for puppies.

They say that this law weakens existing protection. That's false. Section 7 of the proposed law specifically states that it "shall not be construed to limit any state law or regulation protecting the welfare of animals, nor shall anything in this section prevent a local governing body from adopting and enforcing its own animal welfare laws and regulations in addition to this section."

They say that this law endangers newborn puppies. That's false. Puppies under the age of six months are excluded from the temperature requirements of the law.

Unfortunately, there is a core of vocal Tea Partiers in Missouri who call themselves "Alliance for Truth". They oppose any attempts to regulate puppy mill abuses because they actively protect irresponsible breeding practices -- such as those committed by Rob Hurd, administrator of their Facebook page.

In 2008, Rob and his wife LouAnn were slapped with a $10,000 fine and a cease-and-desist order for selling undocumented, diseased dogs with canine brucellosis.

Another AFT member, Colleen Slaughter, maintains a breeding operation under the name "Diamond Doodles". Her website describes how you can purchase her dogs over the internet through credit card, Paypal, or Walmart MoneyGram. She'll ship your puppy "in the same compartments as baggage, mail and other cargo", and provides helpful information on how to clean the urine and feces off your terrified puppy when it arrives.

Alliance for Truth has no interest in protecting Missouri's abused dogs. They only seek to protect the profits made through the death and suffering of innocent animals.

Don't be fooled by the flag-waving rhetoric and false claims of the puppy mill apologists.

Vote YES on Prop B!

Tea partiers have No respect for animals or for humans, they are a disgusting bunch from palin on down. I was going to say I would like some of them to be treated the way animals in puppy mills are treated, but then hastily I rejected this, we definitely couldn't stand any more of them being bred. Tea partiers that is.

Puppy mills are horrfically cruel and in our age of rampant pet overpopulation definintely a part of the problem. The Tea Party just want another controversial newsmaking issue to protest about. As I am sure they, as do we all, understand that Puppy Mills are wrong and bad I wonder when they will understand that their actions/attitudes are also the same?

1 2 | »


Recommended on Facebook


In Case You Missed It...


Pet Adoption Resources

Recent Posts