A voice of reason from the Dog Law Advisory Board:
Guest Essay: Bureaucratic fiat undoes crucial dog law reform
By NANCY E. GARDNER
var requestedWidth = 0;
if(requestedWidth > 0){
document.getElementById(‘articleViewerGroup’).style.width = requestedWidth + “px”;
document.getElementById(‘articleViewerGroup’).style.margin = “0px 0px 10px 10px”;
}
Who let the dogs down? Apparently the same people Gov. Rendell appointed to raise them up.
Lobbyists for commercial breeders failed to trump the will of the voters when Act 119 — the puppy mill reform law — was passed. It seems, however, that those same lobbyists have succeeded when it comes to appointed bureaucrats.
On July 14, Secretary of Agriculture Russell Redding issued a policy statement reversing a major requirement of Act 119, namely, the requirement for unfettered access to outdoor exercise. On that same day, Secretary Redding reversed another requirement — the ban on housing adult dogs on wire. He accomplished this by withdrawing the previously submitted Canine Health Board regulations, inserting an exemption from solid flooring for pregnant and nursing mothers, and resubmitting the regulations. The reasons given are that puppies need wire flooring for sanitation, and outdoor access poses a danger to puppies.
So all the hard work toward the passage of a new law to guarantee puppy mill breeding dogs a solid surface to stand on and access to outdoor exercise — a law designed specifically to benefit the mothers who live their entire lives in commercial kennels — was undone by a policy written with utter disregard for the law.
Did the Department of Agriculture think we weren’t paying attention anymore, so this could quietly slide by?
When Act 119 was still just pending legislation, commercial breeders’ lobbyists assured these breeders they could block the legislation. When the bill passed the House and Senate, largely due to the demands of Pennsylvania voters, breeders were stunned.
Their lawyers immediately sued the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. Breeders assumed the suit would succeed, so they made no changes in their facilities, or in the way they treated their dogs, to get ready for start of enforcement of the new rules in October 2009. When the lawsuit was unsuccessful, the rush to apply for waivers from the new law was on.
The Bureau of Dog Law Enforcement granted 81 waivers allowing kennels that mass produce dogs anywhere from one to three more years to come into compliance. (The average life span of a breeding dog in a puppy mill is six years, so for most of the dogs suffering in these hellholes no relief would ever come.)
This sounds pretty disappointing so far, doesn’t it? But the worst was yet to come and, sure enough, it arrived as a “legal interpretation” by bureaucrats.
Anyone who knows anything about breeding dogs knows that the mother cleans up after her puppies for the first few weeks of their lives. Anyone who knows anything about the intent of the law we worked so passionately to pass was to put dogs that spend their entire lives in commercial kennels on solid flooring. Pennsylvania officials took it upon themselves to interpret the law contrary to its very specific wording, giving the reason that puppies may be housed on wire up to 12 weeks, a stipulation intended for weaned puppies and puppies in broker kennels, not for a mother nursing a litter.
At the June Dog Law Advisory Board meeting, a representative for the breeders actually thanked the Bureau of Dog Law Enforcement for accommodating them, which is not surprising since it seems they are working for his clients rather than the voters of Pennsylvania.
Who gave the Department of Agriculture and the Bureau of Dog Law Enforcement the right to blatantly ignore the language of the law so many fought so hard to pass?
I hope you share my outrage. People appointed to work for the welfare of dogs in Pennsylvania are instead pandering to the greed of breeders who still can’t believe they will have to change the way they do business. They have repeatedly postponed enforcement of laws they are legally bound to enforce. This is bureaucracy at its very worst. Those perpetrating these injustices should be held accountable.
The House and Senate Agricultural and Rural Affairs committees have 20 days to take action. If they don’t, the Independent Regulatory Review Commission will vote on August 19, after which the regulations will go to the Attorney General for review. Once published in the Pennsylvania Bulletin, the regulations will be final.
If we as voters do nothing, female dogs will be on wire in Pennsylvania just as they have been for decades since farmers decided dogs would be a good cash crop.
It’s time to contact the governor, your state senator, and your local representatives and tell them what you think of the Department of Agriculture and its officials for their egregious courting of the favor of large commercial breeders.
We are not asking for a debate about wire flooring, access to exercise, or any other issue in the July 14 policy statement. That fight was won two years ago when the law was passed. We want the law to be enforced — period.
Time is of the essence if you care about the suffering of dogs in factories where they live as nameless, lonely creatures. Who let the dogs down? The answer is very clear.
————
Nancy E. Gardner is a member of the Pennsylvania Dog Law Advisory Board.