USDA meeting with PA canine Farmers

Pits in the news and info on Breed Specific Legislation.

Postby Maryellen » July 11th, 2006, 7:51 pm

Original Message -----
From: jan cooper
Sent: Monday, July 10, 2006 5:42 PM
Subject: GENINFO: USDA meeting with canine 'farmers' in PA

FYI....I just got this in........some scary thoughts, we have
permission to forward. .....I have done no editing, the following
letter is as I received it.........jan

At 06:27 PM 7/9/2006, you wrote:
>I recently attented a meeting with the Pennsylvania Department of
>Agticulture - Department of Animal Control.
>I listened intently for about 90 minutes regarding how the
>enforcement of current laws regarding existing puppy mills would
>have a disatrous effect on the the Mennonite and Amish communities,
>that had given up their primary agricultural crop of tobacco to
>become successful breeders of all types of dogs.
>During this discussion the subject of TAILED ROTTWEILERS came
>up...the oponion is that this NEW BREED of Rottweiler should not be
>declared a VICIOUS dog - because there has been so little time to do
>any research into THIS NEW BREED...
>The farmers are claiming that since they speak the same language as
>that of the FCI - that should be allowed to import fresh bloodlines
>from Europe and attempt to determine if the NEW BREED is as vicous
>as the existing breed - that has been here in America for almost 60
>years and has been turned from the loving family dogs that they
>raise to that of uncontrollable vicous dogs that are now so largely
>bred by irresponsible breeders outside of their communities.
>After a bit of uncontrollable laughing from the gallery the lawyer,
>thats right the lawyer for the farmers asked why we were laughing -
>I got up and with the permission of the chairman, i tried to with a
>straight face explain that the NEW BREED AND OLD BREED were one int the same.
>And the idea that the farmers were raising loveing puppies who were
>allegdedly raised in the home was about as truthful as Clinton not
>having had sex with woman.
>Given all of the BSL legisaltion that is overcrowding the courts the
>lawyer for the farmers pointed out that recently the parent club of
>Rottweilers in this country have not been successful in introducing
>an alternative breed standard that coincided with that of the FCI in
>that a Rottweiler had a tail...the chairman had asked as to the
>interpatation of the new FCI bill and the attorney said that
>ROTTWEILERS must have tails in order to be judged in Europe and most
>of the world - but here in the United States that we held ourselves
>above the rest of the world and decreed that Rottweilers need not
>have a Tail as their cousin from across the pond...
>The chairman asked if i was a Rottweiler breeder...I stated that in
>the past while being a member of the Colonial Rottweiler Club that
>yes i had bred my
>bitches in accordance with the Code of Ethics that was at the time
>the standard to which we maintained our breed...and, at that time
>there was only the standard that Rottweilers did not have a
>tail...He then asked if I was still a member of the Colonial or the
>American Rottweiler Club and if I still had Rottweilers....At this
>time - I took a deep breath - thought for a moment - and said that -
>yes I still have Rottweilers (2) but that I was no longer a member
>of the CRC or The ARC...that I thought that a rottweiler is given
>the right upbringing and proper socialization a natural addition to
>the family as both a companion and friend that its owner could count
>on in the time of trouble...I stated that whether the Rottweiler had
>a tail or not has nothing to do with the quality of the breed,
>however i also stated that farmers turned puppy mills were more
>concerned with producing as many rottweiler puppies as they could &
>has much forethought about genetics as they did about the way they
>allow brothers and sister to marry within their own communities as
>opposed to the way that breeders who belong to Code of Ethics clubs,
>are more concerned about bettering the breed through research and
>progeny produced than by making a living from the indiscrimnate sale
>of puppies through pet shops and over the web.
>I explained that for the majority of code of ethic clubs, that we
>care where are progeny go, that we do extensive research into the
>background of the potential parents and are akin to seeing what they
>have produced in the past, so that we may better the future...
>The attorney for the farmers interjected that they do the same, I
>said the same what....I said in your communities you allow brothers
>and sisters to marry, that you allow 1st cousins to marry, that you
>already know what will be produced because you have your own book of
>past marriages, but you do not concern yourselves as to what will
>happen to your progeny because they very rarely leave
>home.... Whereas we on the outside world are concerned about
>genetics an the adverse effects of doing line breedings and are
>concerned regading where our progeny go because we as a rule do not
>keep them all at home.
>The chairman asked what is the position of the ARC & CRC regarding
>the tail controversay ...I explained that the membership was split
>and that the parent club during its last national had in on its list
>of topics to discuss, but managed to sidestep the discussion when a
>report of a false tornadoe warning was conveniently issued. an as to
>my knowledge it has not been at that time decided one way or the other....
>I was asked if I was still an active member of either club - my
>answer was a short and to the point NO! the question was as to why...
>I said that given the fact that the current board of
>governors(directors) were more concerned about whether or not the
>Rottweiler had a tail and less concerned as to the fighting of the
>attempts to ban our breed or limit it right to survive as we know it
>- goes to show me that like Republicans and Democrats they can not
>ever agree on anything other than what is deemed petty to the public
>but of extreme importance to themselves....
>I also expressed the fact that given the increasing amount of BSL
>legislation that is creeping up around this country that the primary
>target for all clubs is to first protect the breed and then settle
>the petty bullshizzle later....
>I also stated that I have other breeds and that in addition to
>making sure that have the right to own them as I maintain my right
>to own Rottweilers that
>when I see goverment officals attempting to deny me this right then
>it is time to stand and fight for the right to own dogs, as many as
>I want as long as they are properly cared for and not likely to have
>an adverse effect on the community at large!
>I was the only rottweiler owner there..there were owners of pit
>bull, amstaff, german shepherds, dobermans & danes - but no one else
>from the world of Rotts!
>OUR BREED is going to get banned...
>Either stand and fight or bury your heads deeper into the ground.
>and get the hell out of the way for those of who want to keep our Breed alive

Name removed by jan

(jan cooper)
The OLDEST BSL site in the world
and home of BSL BROADCASTS
Rottweiler database manager on PAW VILLAGE
The Lord will never give us more than he knows we can bear..
I live here
Posts: 5971

Return to Pit Bull news and BSL

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users