"Perfect wisdom has four parts ~ Wisdom, the principle of doing things aright. Justice, the principle of doing things equally in public and private. Fortitude, the principle of not fleeing danger, but meeting it. Temperance, the principle of subduing desires and living moderately."
~ Plato
February 2023: @Gamedogs was confiscated by Twitter last month. Gamedogs.org has been online since before anyone ever even thought of Twitter, and on Twitter since 2009 - but they have decided that this account is somehow suddenly suspicious and locked me out. I have been approached numerous times over the years by various "gamers" that wanted my handle. Now it's just been taken, and obviously I will not be "verifying" any phone number for the incel clown king billionaire. I posted my suspension at: SuspensionReport.com.
I'm happy to report and cheer for another defeat of the extremists and their agenda. A dog is property and cannot be "saved" or "rescued".
If the dog in this story is really 19 years old it couldn't have been treated that badly by its owner; I applaud anyone that has cared for the same dog for almost 20 years! Most 19 year old dogs, on a chain or otherwise, will tend towards looking kind of rough anyway. By about 13 or so they start going downhill even with great care, especially the larger breed dogs (it's a shepherd/mix according to the story).
Be sure and take a moment to review THIS DOCUMENT. It shows that this woman runs a group that has "rescued from chaining situations" animals and collected over $60,000 for doing so. If any of you live in this area (Tyrone/Altoona, Pennsylvania) and you or someone you know had a dog disappear off of a chain or from a closed backyard in the last few years I suggest you contact your local police with a copy of this article and ask that they investigate whether this woman was involved. If you need any assistance in this regard, please email me. She has clearly admitted to doing this numerous times, thank goodness this terrorist and thief was finally caught! Clearly she is but an individual example of these extremists and how they want to keep pushing the envelope. She seems to think that taking people's property, either off of a chain or from a backyard is justified if she doesn't approve of their methods or situation. If there is some real problem, that's what animal control is for (who by the way in this situation knew of her crime and did nothing initially), not vigilante Aristas. Let's be sure we hold these thieves and extremists accountable when we can!
I have also reviewed THIS DOCUMENT from another extremist group stating the following "In addition, many jurisdictions ban chaining or tethering of dogs. Chaining is cruel and causes dogs to become frustrated and neurotic. Dogs such as Doogie are often forgotten at the end of the chain, with poor vet care and no social interaction. Chaining dogs also makes them more aggresive. Best Friends looks forward to working with local authorities on a model ordinance banning chaining of dogs and the studies showing the link between chaining and dog agression. It is a community safety as well as cruelty issue." Once again these extremists break the law then offer to help fix the situation by penalizing the law abiding citizens that they've terrorized. I plan to write this judge and point out the factual inaccuracies and situational unfairness of those representations. I hope any of you that can make polite reasonable comments will do so as well.
Also, please be sure and vote in the poll!
Judge: Dogs are property...
Ruling means Tammy Grimes can’t argue she was justified in ‘rescuing‘ sick animal
By Phil Ray This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
POSTED: November 6, 2007
Poll
Is the judge right, are dogs legal property? Yes, just like a car. 73%
Yes, but people should be able to take other dogs if they're in danger. 20%
A popular bumper sticker says ‘Dogs are people too,‘ but that is not the case under Pennsylvania law, according to a Blair County judge.
Judge Elizabeth Doyle stated in an opinion filed Monday that dogs are ‘personal property,‘ which means they can be stolen.
Doyle’s ruling means Tammy Grimes of Bellwood can’t argue to a jury that she was legally justified when she took a 19-year-old Shepherd mix from the yard of its owner in East Freedom last year.
Grimes, the founder of the dog rescue organization Dogs Deserve Better, says she took the dog because it appeared to be mistreated.
‘Testimony that the defendant sought to present at trial to justify her actions would not be admissible for that purpose [justification],‘ Doyle said.
‘The court cannot, and will not, however, enact a pre-trial ban on all prospective testimony about the defendant’s actions,‘ Doyle said.
Defense attorney Phillip O. Robertson and District Attorney Richard Consiglio interpreted the judge’s ruling to mean Grimes will be allowed to tell her side of the story.
Grimes was charged with theft by unlawful taking and receiving stolen property for taking the dog from the yard of Steve and Lori Arnold.
A neighbor complained the pet was lying in the yard for a couple of days and even called 911 to report what she considered mistreatment of the dog.
Grimes and Robertson wanted to argue to the jury that she legally was in the right for taking the dog to rescue it from harm.
Doyle stated the defense of justification comes into play when a person believes he or she must act to prevent harm to himself or another.
The word ‘another‘ refers to human beings, not pets, the judge said.
Pennsylvania’s Superior Court has ruled that a person can’t sue for ‘loss of companionship‘ because of the death of an animal, an indication the courts do not consider a dog or other pets in the same category as a person, Doyle said.
She wrote, ‘Many Americans love dogs and lavish upon them material substance and tender loving care.
‘Judges are not immune to such feelings, but must set them aside to follow that law.‘
In her ruling, Doyle also stated that the prosecution can place a witness on the stand who contends Grimes encouraged her to steal dogs from owners’ properties to rescue them.
Other pretrial questions concerning the defense’s use of videotape of the sickly dog and the prosecution’s use of an expert witness won’t be resolved until the time of the trial, Doyle said.
More of what we've all seen going on for years now. These humaniacs are well funded and very dangerous. Their (somewhat) hidden goal is the abolition of all hunting, animal use and ownership.
HSUS growth is threat to sportsmen
November 28, 2007
In a precisely-calculated effort, the Humane Society of the United States is assuming control of the animal rights movement’s political agenda. In doing so, it becomes an even greater threat to conservation and hunters’ rights.
Wayne Pacelle, the mastermind behind HSUS, recently told the Chronicle of Philanthropy that his organization may soon merge with at least three unnamed animal rights organizations. The HSUS calls itself a mainstream animal charity, but the growing organization has already joined forces with groups that push a none-too-conventional anti-hunting, anti-trapping agenda.
‘The HSUS is playing up a mainstream reputation in hopes of becoming the primary mouthpiece for the animal rights movement,‘ said USSA President Bud Pidgeon. ‘It is not difficult to convince a smaller group to unite with a multi-million dollar organization that will push its political agenda - be it to end hunting or eliminate animal research. Sportsmen will no-doubt see HSUS continue to grow in this way.‘
Power in Numbers
By absorbing the other groups, HSUS adds to its membership and bank accounts, which gives it even more political muscle. The group now has 10.5 million members or supporters, up from 7.4 million five years ago.
When Pacelle took control of HSUS in 2004, he realized the way to advance his political agenda was to develop an even larger following of animal activists. It was not by chance that HSUS assumed control of the Fund for Animals in 2005 and the Doris Day Animal League in 2006. It was all part of a plan to make HSUS the powerful and efficient mouthpiece for the animal rights movement.
Bank On It
With a staggering $112-million budget, a new legislative arm and a political action committee to boot, HSUS definitely has lawmakers’ attention. The group spent $2.5 million this year to push state and federal animal rights legislation. Last year, for the first time, it got directly involved in candidate elections and spent $600,000 to back or oppose nominees based on their animal-related voting history.
To remain in control of the animal rights movement, HSUS plans to continue its financial development. In fact, it will soon begin a five year, $100-million fund-raising effort that will put its budget well over $200 million!
Looks Can Be Deceiving
Sportsmen know the HSUS is a political machine that campaigns to ban hunting.
The HSUS tries to sell itself as a group with mainstream goals, but if that were truly the case, would it merge with animal rights organizations that stigmatize and try to prohibit hunting and trapping?
For example, it led the effort to bulldoze dove hunting via the ballot box in Michigan, and it championed a recent bear hunting ban in New Jersey.
Those and dozens of other overt attacks on hunting are not the only threats HSUS poses to sportsmen. It has also plotted no-holds-barred campaigns that will have subtle, yet equally devastating, impacts on outdoor sports.
Sportsmen who breed and raise hunting dogs are being caught up in proposals that HSUS advocates as efforts to wipe out large-scale, abusive dog breeders. At the same time, the anti’s are fanning a public frenzy against animal fighting and lobbying for legislation that could make sportsmen who hunt with dogs vulnerable to animal cruelty charges. For instance, if a dog breaks point and grabs a pheasant the hunter could be charged with an act of animal cruelty. The USSA Sporting Dog Defense Coalition is on call to make sure hunters’ rights are protected. ...
What a terrible abuse of power. The dog looks like some sort of pit bull mix to me; I wonder if that had anything to do with this rushed judge-jury-executioner attack by the cop. This was done in front of a school bus off-loading.
EXCLUSIVE: Family Shocked, Outraged after Deputy Shoots Pet Dog in their Yard Family Suing County
Story Published: Nov 20, 2007 at 10:00 PM MST Story Updated: Nov 22, 2007 at 12:34 AM MST
A Teton County, Idaho family is outraged after they say a sheriff's deputy tried to murder their dog in their own front yard.
The Barboza family has owned their dog Bobby for five years. A few days ago they say a Teton County Idaho Sheriff's Deputy knocked on their door demanding to see the dog.
Leonel Barboza, Dog Owner: "He says, 'I'm here to put him down. I'm here to kill him.'"
The officer told Leo Barboza there had been a complaint Bobby had bitten someone.
Barboza: "I said, 'Do you have any proof or anything?' He says, 'I don't need any proof.'"
So Leo got the dog while the deputy pulled out a rifle from his car. They walked a few feet from the Barboza's home where Leo's wife and his three year old son were inside.
Leo and the officer tied the dog to a pole when the deputy fired three shots. The dog then collapsed. Leo's son heard the gunshots and opened the front door. Meanwhile...
Barboza: "A bunch of kids just got off the bus and they were all on the street. All the kids were watching the officer shooting the dog. My heart was broken seeing an officer killing my dog."
The deputy then got in his vehicle and drove away leaving the dog bleeding profusely from his head almost dead.
Barboza: "I came back inside with my wife and hid. We were hugging each other crying about our dog because we were gonna miss him. He's been with us for five years."
That night Leo's father-in-law, who witnessed the whole thing, had a nervous breakdown and had to be hospitalized. When the family returned home from the hospital a few days later, they were shocked to see their dog alive.
Barboza: "My wife called me up and she's like, 'Hey, the dog's alive!' I was like, 'What are you serious?' I was happy my dog was alive."
The Teton County Idaho Sheriff wouldn't say much about this case except that it's still under investigation. He also said there's been numerous complaints about the Barboza's dog. But when I checked court records, I could only find one complaint filed last year and that was dismissed.
Nate Eaton, Channel 3 Eyewitness News: "Did your dog ever bite anybody?"
Barboza: "Not to my knowledge. No."
Eaton: "And this was the first time you'd ever heard of any complaint?"
Barboza: "Yes, this is the first time. I still think about it. You know my kid thinks all the cops are bad because an officer came and shot his dog. Honestly when I think about it I get mad too and I don't trust that officer any more."
The Barboza's took Bobby to the vet. He's now on medication to get the wounds taken care of. The holes in his head will be sewn up after Thanksgiving.
The family has hired attorney Josh Garner. I spoke with him this evening and he says, "If the facts are as they appear, the deputies behavior is disgusting, troublesome, and appalling. The officer needs to be held responsible."
Several sources say the officer is still on duty and still working in the county.
If you have a comment on this story, email us This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. or This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it..
To support the Barboza family legally or financially, email their attorney Josh Garner at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
One of the most important vaccine research studies in veterinary medicine is underway at the University of Wisconsin School of Veterinary Medicine in Madison. Dr. Ronald Schultz, a leading authority on veterinary vaccines and Chair of the Department of Pathobiological Sciences, has begun concurrent 5 and 7 year challenge studies to determine the long-term duration of immunity of the canine rabies vaccine, with the goal of extending the state-mandated interval for boosters. These will be the first long-term challenge studies on the canine rabies vaccine to be published in the United States.
Dr. Schultz comments that: "We are all very excited to start this study that will hopefully demonstrate that rabies vaccines can provide a minimum of 7 years of immunity."
This research is being financed by The Rabies Challenge Fund, a charitable trust founded by pet vaccine disclosure advocate Kris L. Christine of Maine, who serves as Co-Trustee with world-renowned veterinary research scientist and practicing clinician, Dr. W. Jean Dodds of Hemopet in California. The Rabies Challenge Fund recently met its goal of $177,000 to fund the studies’ first year budget with contributions from dog owners, canine groups, trainers, veterinarians, and small businesses. Annual budget goals of $150,000 for the studies must be met in the future.
Dr. Jean Dodds, DVM states: "This is the first time in my 43 years of involvement in veterinary issues that what started as a grass-roots effort to change an outmoded regulation affecting animals will be addressed scientifically by an acknowledged expert to benefit all canines in the future."
Scientific data published in 1992 by Michel Aubert and his research team demonstrated that dogs were immune to a rabies challenge 5 years after vaccination, while Dr. Schultz’s serological studies documented antibody titer counts at levels known to confer immunity to rabies 7 years post-vaccination. This data strongly suggests that state laws requiring annual or triennial rabies boosters for dogs are redundant. Because the rabies vaccine is the most potent of the veterinary vaccines and associated with significant adverse reactions, it should not be given more often than is necessary to maintain immunity. Adverse reactions such autoimmune diseases affecting the thyroid, joints, blood, eyes, skin, kidney, liver, bowel and central nervous system; anaphylactic shock; aggression; seizures; epilepsy; and fibrosarcomas at injection sites are linked to rabies vaccinations.
Study co-trustee Kris Christine adds: ‘Because the USDA does not require vaccine manufacturers to provide long-term duration of immunity studies documenting maximum effectiveness when licensing their products, concerned dog owners have contributed the money to fund this research themselves. We want to ensure that rabies immunization laws are based upon independent, long-term scientific data.‘
More information and regular updates on The Rabies Challenge Fund and the concurrent 5 and 7 year challenge studies it is financing can be found at the fund’s website designed by volunteer Andrea Brin at: RabiesChallengeFund.org.
It seems the ever greedy HSUS is trying to buy the VIck dogs. We can all just imagine the amount of money and media attention this move would generate for them. Of course they don't operate any actual shelters and it seems like decent folks are already standing by with good homes for the dogs, unfortunately that would only be truly HUMANE to the dogs and not the HSUS wallet or their donation-hungry publicity machine. This is from a dog law email list I'm on.
As you all know, we have a rescue team in place that has been standing by for over 6 months to take in the non-fighting dogs at Michael Vick's property.
It has just come to my attention that the County now plans to give the dogs to HSUS - not to rescue. This means several things. First, the ambulance chasers will get miles and miles (and likely millions of dollars worth of publicity) out of this. People who don't know any better might actually think that HSUS puts dogs first. We all know that their wallets come first.
Second, the dogs will likely be sent to HSUS sponsored shelters. These poor dogs have been confined for seven months. We have nice comfy foster homes lined up but they will likely be back in a concrete kennel. Haven't they suffered enough?
Finally, I believe that if any of these dogs make it out of these shelters alive, there is a very good chance that a large number of potential adopters will want them just because they had an association with Vick. Our team decided that we were not going to tell potential adopters where the dogs came from. We believe it was in their best interest to treat them like any other rescue. We are extremely concerned that people will want them for the wrong reasons.
Surry County promised these dogs to us many months ago. They have now changed their mind and gone back on their promise. I believe it is because HSUS gave them a buttload of money (in effect, buying the dogs). I also believe that Surry County is angry with me because I had all of you contact them. Tyrone Franklin asked someone close to me to ask us to back off because we were disrupting county business with all of our phone calls. Oh well. Too bad.
So, my friends..... I am asking you once again to call Surry County and educate them about the mistake they are making in giving these dogs to HSUS. Tell them that these innocent dogs have suffered enough - they deserve a foster home - not a concrete kennel. They deserve a home because they are good dogs - not because they were associated with a dog fighter.
Please forward this widely and ask everyone you know to call:
Call Tyrone Franklin, County Administrator for Surry County at 757.294.5271. If you call after hours, you can leave voicemail. If his voicemail is full, some people have said that they are randomly dialing other extensions and leaving messages - asking that they be forwarded to Mr. Franklin. Of course, I don't condone this.
Second, call Bill Hefty - County Attorney - at 804.780.3143. Note that Bill's secretary Connie is very supportive and very nice. If you call during working hours, please BE NICE TO HER. She has been a pleasure to deal with.
We are going to use the ballot box and the democratic process to stop all hunting in the United States...We will take it species by species until all hunting is stopped in California. Then we will take it state by state. - Humane Society of the United States Executive Director Wayne Pacelle
November 15, 2007 The Hannah Report
It was a "nervous" Senate Agriculture Committee chairman who took continuing testimony Wednesday on a bill that began nine months ago as dog fighting legislation but has since grown to include the related problem of cock fighting, a form of animal abuse that would seem on its face a logical extension of sponsoring Rep. John White's (R-Kettering) original concerns.
Chairman Larry Mumper (R-Marion) announced during the hearing that he had taken a call from the Humane Society of the U.S. (HSUS), an original proponent of HB71 in the House, disavowing any link to domestic terrorism, a surprising proposition considering the group's benign name. That allegation took on greater clarity Wednesday when bill opponents from the Ohio Gamefowl Breeders Association presented Mumper with a photo of HSUS activist J.P. Goodwin with a tshirt bearing the words Animal Liberation Front (ALF), which has been declared a terrorist threat by the U.S. Dept. of Homeland Security. Goodwin is generally reported to be a former member of ALF.
Joshua Codner of the Gamefowl Breeders Association, a self-described scientist with a B.S. in chemistry and a B.S. in physics, told Mumper and fellow committee members that the bill would only further the confusion of game fowl hobbyists with those who breed gamecocks for their traditional use in "blood sports," as he called them. HB71 is guilty of a sin of omission rather than a sin of commission, suggested Codner, in that the bill targets "cockfighting" without distinguishing birds destined for show from birds destined for the ring.
"We oppose HB71 specifically because it is intended to target our breed of poultry based on breed and appearance only; therefore, we are guilty until proven innocent...." he argued. "This type of legislation is...stereotypical in nature and has caused unnecessary harassment to law abiding citizens in other states where adopted, but we are already being harassed without HB71...."
Codner cited three incidents over the past two years in which members of his group were purportedly accused of cockfighting "without any physical evidence," a plea to burden-of-proof issues that would dominate committee comments by Sen. Tim Grendell (R-Chesterland).
"The reason for the immediate impression of animal fighting based on appearance is due to the influence of the radical animal rights activists, mainly HSUS and their role in providing training information to peace officers," said Codner.
The committee had already heard from one such officer, Dog Warden Mark Kumpf of Montgomery County, and would later hear from a second proponent of the bill, detective Sgt. David Hunt of the Franklin County Sheriff's Office, who noted his previous work for HSUS in testimony before the U.S. House of Representatives.
...Hunt told the committee of his own connection to HSUS, identifying himself as one of the very consultants the group employs to train law enforcement in the investigation of dog fighting. After committee, he disavowed any connection to animal rights interests as such and any specific knowledge of Goodwin's involvement with ALF. "I'm here to put dogfighters in jail, period."
After Codner, a second opponent had reminded members of the considerable effort legislators had expended on animal welfare reforms in 124-SB221 (Goodman).
"That legislation was no sooner on the books than the animal rights organizations were back in the halls of our statehouse, lobbying for yet more changes to [Revised Code] Sec. 959, still claiming Ohio doesn't do enough to protect its animals," said Polly Britton of the Oho Association of Animal Owners (OAAO). "This substitute bill...is an undisguised work of the animal rights contingent, and one which the OAAO, and hopefully this committee, must oppose...."
...After the hearing, Chairman Mumper met privately with Codner for further consultation, saying before leaving the committee room that he remained wary of HSUS's involvement, reassurances notwithstanding.
Virginia Senate District 37 - 100% of 39 Reporting
Kenneth Cuccinelli *
18,596
50%
Janet Oleszek
18,505
50%
It's my sincere hope that this site helped bring out the 91 people that voted and made the winning difference for a defender of traditional humane values and not "humane" society extremist agendas.
October 27, 2007
The HSUS has targeted ads against Virginia State Senator Ken Cuccinelli because he voted AGAINST their extremist agenda. I suggest anyone living within the Fairfax County 37th District in Virginia VOTE FOR Senator Cuccinelli on Tuesday, November 6th!
District 37
D
Janet S. Oleszek
10500 Indigo Ln. Fairfax VA 22032-3733 (703) 323-1771 This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
R
Kenneth T. Cuccinelli II
PO Box 606 Centreville, VA 20122 703-766-0635 This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
Here are some highlights and a link to a Letter to the Editor by Mr. Cuccinelli regarding the FACTS about this issue, it's pretty enlightening on his position and is also a good example of how extreme the HSUS PROPAGANDA is about this sort of thing.
"Please keep in mind, the following list of crimes are class 1 misdemeanors ’ they carry a lesser penalty than a Class 6 felony, which would have been the penalty for cockfighting under the original bill: * Assault or Battery by Mob; * Recruitment into a known criminal street gang (e.g., MS-13); * Kidnapping by a parent; * Hazing of youth gang members; * Reckless handling of a firearm so as to endanger life, limb or property; * Assault and Battery; * Assault and Battery against a household member (i.e., domestic violence); * Threat to kill or harm school personnel while on school property; * Stalking, wherein the victim is put in reasonable fear of death or bodily injury; * Sexual Battery; * Infected sexual battery. These are crimes against human beings. The crime of fighting chickens is an awful crime, but the question for me was ‘˜is it worse than domestic violence? Is it worse than infected sexual battery? Is it worse than assault and battery by mob?’ My view is that these misdemeanors are substantially more serious than cockfighting. ... The punishment for crimes against animals should not be the same as punishment for crimes against PEOPLE. And I do not believe putting someone who fights chickens in jail for an entire year is a wise use of our tax dollars. Bottom line: I voted against the cockfighting bill because it put crimes against chickens on a par with crimes against human beings."
This guy was found INNOCENT BY A JURY. When he asked where his dogs were after his acquittal he was told that many were already dead, killed by KILL CRAZY humaniacs! This guy obviously loved his dogs and everyone in his neighborhood talked about what a great pet owner he was. I hope he sues the State for wrongful prosecution and for the value of his dogs that they killed in addition to punitive damages for destroying his dogs and giving them away to other people when he was guilty of NOTHING! Be sure and notice the comment about the State Attorney asking jurors to "wonder" about why he was keeping dogs as though innuendo and supposition was enough to prosecute this innocent man criminally. This is another heartbreaking story of animal and human cruelty committed by those that claim to be acting on behalf of justice and the dogs.
Alva man not guilty of cruelty to animals
By Pat Gillespie This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. November 09, 2007
Anthony Pew insisted from the beginning he wasn’t guilty of animal abuse and using equipment to train dogs to fight.
After about an hour of deliberating Thursday, a Lee County jury agreed, finding him not guilty of both counts.
Pew, 43, of 16911 First St. in Alva, was approached in May 2006, when a 10-year-old complained one of his 23 dogs had bitten him. When investigators got to Pew’s house, they found separate kennels, dog treadmills and a tetherball pole.
Animal Control investigators concluded the equipment was used for dogfighting and the Lee County Sheriff’s Office, five months later, charged him with training the 23 pit bulls to fight. The third-degree felony charge carried a possible five-year prison sentence.
Pew took the stand Thursday and defended himself, professing his love for animals and desire to bring abandoned dogs back to heath. He detailed where and from whom he got each dog and explained why he was giving them protein-rich food and supplements. The treadmills, he explained, were used because he couldn’t walk 23 dogs a day and some needed extra exercise.
No witnesses during the two-day trial testified they had seen dogfighting on Pew’s property.
Pew testified he tried to get the dogs back from Animal Services, but they refused, saying they were evidence against him. But they levied $3,500 in fines because they needed tags and vaccinations, so Pew worked 400 hours of community service to pay off the debt. By end of the service, the dogs had been euthanized or adopted to owners.
‘I don’t understand none of this,‘ he said on the witness stand, breaking into tears.
Defense attorney Sawyer Smith asked Pew whether he had conditioned a dog to fight.
‘No,‘ Pew responded. ‘I’ve conditioned a dog to health.‘
Assistant State Attorney Eric Forte asked jurors to wonder why all the dogs Pew owned were pit bulls and were aggressive toward other animals. In many cases, he said, Pew would take in a dog that had fought and then bring it back to health and return it to its owner.
Fort Myers - A Southwest Florida man accused of training dogs to fight no longer has to fight for his freedom. This came after tearful testimony from the defendant himself. Anthony Pew started sobbing as he told the court how Animal Services put dozens of his dogs to death after accusations he trained the animals to fight. Pew admitted having the conditioning equipment but insisted his intentions were good. In the end, the jury agreed, reaching a not guilty verdict after only an hour of deliberation. Assistant State Attorney Eric Forte said, "We didn't have anyone to say, 'I know Anthony Pew is training these dogs to fight,' and that might have been the problem." Defense attorney Robert Harris said, "It's been what, a year and half now, and they [the state] weren't able to come up with any evidence whatsoever that Anthony was involved with any sort of organized dog fighting." The defense believes what really sealed the deal was the testimony of a man who won several dog show trophies that he credits to Pew's dog training - proving the equipment was not intended for dog fighting.
GUILTY GUILTY GUILTY !!!!!!!!!!!! JUSTICE WAS SERVED !!!!!!!!!!!!
It should be noted that this is one of the leading AR nuts that helped to start and keep going anti-tethering hysteria, propaganda and legislation.
I've held off on posting more on this until the verdict came down, and it did just a bit ago, GUILTY! I also didn't want some fools to make us look bad in this one like they did the brian dunne blog (a la don dricker). I had been fighting with these AR nuts on the altoonamirror articles for weeks now on and off. These people are NUTS! I was called a sociopath and "human centric" (lol!) for saying that it was ok for dogs to live outdoors and that I was a dog owner, not 'guardian'.
This woman felt that because she was president of this non profit group she had the authority to swear out a criminal complaint against the owners of the dog she's been CONVICTED OF STEALING.
Here's an excerpt: as the president of a nonprofit animal rescue organization, Tammy has the authority or standing to file her own criminal complaint against the Arnolds. She has done so. She also has authority to seek a search warrant/seizure warrant. I can't speak to any attemtps to do that in this case because she simply did not have time. My point is that she does have authority under the law not held by other private citizens because she isn't just some do-gooder or "AR nut." She has standing under the law to take action.
If in fact that is the case THAT LAW MUST BE CHANGED! This is the sort of thing that the ARs have been pushing recently to allow private citizens to "charge" pet owners and get around the due process of law! Also, clearly 'president of a nonprofit animal rescue organization' and 'AR nut' are not mutually exclusive!
Here's another one I got from the comments posted by her defenders... Her 14 year moved across the country to get away from his bully stepfather...who Tammy is divorced from
my reply there: her kid has to move across the country to get away from someone this thief brought into their lives. great judge of character and situation then eh.
and this little tidbit which is very telling about the mentality of this nut job: This woman make a living off of people that she coerces into giving her money.This case could have been done long ago,but she will do anything for attention.And the more attention she gets the more money she gets from people.This woman kept her kids away from their grandpaps house beause their pap raise beagles for rabbit hunting outside in a large fenced in area.After raising beagles for over 50 yrs, Tammy comes and tells him he can't see his grandkids until he gets rid of his dogs.He did,4 them.This is a criminal and it is believed that she has stolen dogs before,just got caught this time.Anyone who knows her knows she is a bully and if you cross her she is vindictive.Also,where are her kids when she is rescueing dogs,I think her 2 kids need rescued from the filth of her house.10dogs,20+cats all inside,a great place for kids. I think I smell it from here.Poor kids deserve better, in my opinion.
Anyway, GREAT NEWS, good to see decent, sane, law abiding citizens still prevail, at least in this situation.
On Thursday, an investigating officer testified there was no evidence of abuse or neglect.
It was quite the scene in the courtroom when a police officer, also an expert in computer crime investigation, presented thong underwear with a picture of Jake the dog printed on them.
The officer bought the underwear from a Web site to which Tammy Grimes submitted her art for re-sale on apparel. The evidence helped the prosecution make the case that Grimes stole the dog as a pawn for profit. Grimes also sold her own artwork with pictures of the dog on her own Web site.
Other witnesses for the prosecution brought evidence to support accusations that Grimes used Jake as a publicity stunt for Dogs Deserve Better, the organization that she founded. The prosecution replayed audio recordings from a local radio station. On the recordings, Grimes admitted that she took Jake. Grimes also made the admission that she wanted publicity.
If they're not too thin, they're too fat. What kind of crazy world is this becoming that a free roaming pig on a farm that foraged cat and chicken food and becomes fat gets the person taking care of it charged with animal cruelty?!
Pig Sitter Charged; Portly Pet on Diet
Created:11/6/2007 8:32:59 PM Last Updated:11/6/2007 8:33:43 PM
WINONA, Minn. (AP) - A pet pig whose weight tripled while it was in the care of a sitter has been placed on a diet - and an animal cruelty charge has been filed against the caretaker.
The 5-year-old animal, Alaina Templeton, part potbellied pig, has lost 10% of her 150 pounds and is recovering well from surgery to remove a collar that had become embedded in her overly fat neck, owner Michelle Schmitz said.
Alaina made headlines last week after Schmitz complained that the pet sitter had allowed Alaina to go from her normal 50 pounds to 150 pounds in just nine months. Schmitz had left Alaina with the sitter, a co-worker, while she was on medical leave to recover from ankle surgery.
Alaina apparently had been foraging for cat food and chicken feed outdoors at the co-worker's farm.
Schmitz said now that her pet is back home, the excess pounds will "melt off" with a healthy diet and exercise. She said she and Alaina's veterinarian consider 50 pounds a more suitable weight for the mixed-breed pig.
A misdemeanor charge of animal cruelty has been filed against Mary Beesecker, 52, of Houston, Minn., Winona County Sheriff David Brand said.
"I want her to be held responsible for what she did and what she didn't do," Schmitz said.
Beesecker did not immediately respond to a call from The Associated Press seeking comment Tuesday, and she has refused requests from The Winona Daily News for an interview.
These kill-crazy humaniacs saw fit to kill more than a dozen puppies the same day a man was apparently accused of fighting some of his dogs. He was neither charged with a crime nor found guilty of anything, and those poor puppies were certainly guilty of nothing but being "pit bulls" and they had them killed in the same day! Acting in accordance with "Humane" Society standard operating procedure they once again put pressure on law enforcement and public policy and had a group of puppies (and dogs) killed due to baseless fear of and hatred for this breed. I'm sure they also see this as a scare tactic to people who actually care for and about their dogs, unlike these degenerates.
This is just the sort of situation I was describing as a possibility in Missouri in an article below. Those dogs seem to have been given a temporary stay but I have seen reports that the main mouth piece for that "Humane" organization keeping them has led many fights in Missouri to ban hunting.
This particular tragedy occurred in Mississippi and is further evidence of what I keep saying...average people think they are supporting soft and fuzzy do-gooders, but they are really supporting extremists who want to make all animal use or ownership illegal. They also use every tragic chance they get to push forward that agenda, which includes killing every pit bull they possibly can, and each time they make the public more accustomed to swallowing their lies, bigotry and hate. They're sick people lacking the basic compassion they accuse others of being without.
Dozens of dogs killed...
10/30/2007 Daily Journal
BY EMILY LE COZ Daily Journal
BENTON COUNTY - One man was arrested and 49 pit bulls euthanized after an alleged dog-fighting ring was discovered Monday morning here off Highway 7 south.
...
All dogs - including more than one dozen puppies - were released to the sheriff's department and euthanized that evening by Tupelo veterinarian Isis Johnson.
Johnson said it's a shame to put down so many animals but warned that their deaths are the result of the illegal sport.
"These are gaming dogs, and they're bred to fight," said Melissa Chipman, president of the Marshall County Humane Society, which was called to the scene. "Even the puppies have tendencies to fight other animals and even people."
Chipman said she's seen other dog-fighting rings before, but this is by far the biggest.
Contact Daily Journal city reporter Emily Le Coz at 678-1588 or This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
EAST LYME, Conn. -- One canine certainly fulfilled the role of man's best friend on Friday. Witnesses described seeing a tanker truck barrel through the median into oncoming traffic, killing three people and injuring three others on Interstate 95 in East Lyme late Friday morning. The tanker struck a tractor-trailer and at least four cars and overturned.
As chaos broke out on I-95, a heroic pit bull remained calm, sitting in the front seat of a tractor-trailer hit by a tanker truck. As the truck crumbled, the dog stood tall, staying beside his owner until help arrived.
"I was calling to him, but he was just standing there and just guarding his person," said Phyllis Martino, a witness at the scene. The heroic dog stayed right by his owner's side, but arriving firefighters quickly rushed that badly injured driver to the hospital.
That's when another hero was standing by to step in. Vincent Gagliardi said the pit bull was frantic as his owner was carried away. So, Gagliardi took off his belt, ran to the dog, fashioned a leash and got the dog out of there.
"This guy was still sitting in the passenger seat, and there was diesel fuel all around, so I took him out of there," Gagliardi said. Authorities did not release on Friday any identities of those involved in the crash.
Just think, if this was Denver the city would have already killed her dog and she would have been brutally attacked and who knows what.
WOMAN'S DOG FOUGHT OFF INTRUDER, PROVIDED DNA CLUE THAT LED TO SUSPECT'S ARREST
By Sean Webby Mercury News San Jose Mercury News
This was a pit bull mauling everyone can cheer.
Except Anthony Easley.
Easley, 37, was arraigned Thursday on charges of an attempted sexual assault and burglary that took place four months ago in San Jose. It was an attack stopped, and ultimately solved, authorities say, by the ferocious protectiveness of Maya, a 4-year-old pit bull who ended up with the suspect's blood on her face.
The sun was just coming up June 17 and the 31-year-old single mom - who asked not to be identified - was coming back to an empty house. Although she had spent the evening celebrating her birthday at the San Pablo Casino, her spirits were low - she had recently lost her job.
As she started to unlock her front door, she saw a shadow out of the corner of her eye. Someone shoved her from behind.
"My boyfriend works for the police department," she screamed at the mysterious intruder, "and he will be home any minute."
The desperate fib died in her throat as the man began strangling her. "Shut up," he growled as she tried to stab him with her keys.
"Then, I saw my dog's white streak coming from the other room," the victim said. "Maya," she gurgled, "get him!"
Maya attacked. She had always been a gentle dog, ever since the victim adopted the pit bull mix as a puppy from the Humane Society, falling in love with the white dog with brown spots and floppy ears.
Now, Maya was tearing and ripping the stranger's arms.
The man tried to fight off Maya with one hand while keeping his other hand around the woman's throat.
"That's when I grabbed him," said the victim, "where the sun doesn't shine."
At that very painful moment, the attacker let her go.
With Maya snarling and snapping, the attacker gave up. The victim held Maya by her collar as the attacker fled.
When San Jose police officers Iain Fry and Chris Kubasta arrived at the house they didn't find much beyond the signs of a violent struggle. But then, they noticed what looked like a smudge of red above the dog's right eye - possibly the suspect's blood and DNA evidence.
Because Maya was frenzied the victim had to hold her behind a door, while the officer reached around and swabbed a spot just above the dog's snapping teeth - once, twice, three times.
Even Fry didn't think much would come of the sample.
"We never thought they would even run 'em," Fry said of the swabs. "I mean, there's no way - you are talking about one drop of blood on a dog's head. A million to one."
The victim's descriptions helped create a composite sketch.
After checking all sex registrants and other violent parolees in the area, detective Ryan Kimber ran out of leads within a few days.
"In these stranger cases, where there is no relationship between the attacker and the victim, well, those can be very difficult to solve," said Lt. Mark McIninch, who heads San Jose police's Sexual Assault Investigations Unit.
Maya was now hyper-protective, snarling at anyone who came too close to the house or to the woman and her 11-year-old son. Always proud of her strength and independence, the woman said that after the attack, she was scared, depressed, barely able to get out of the house and crying all the time.
"I thought he would come back all pissed off," she said, "and finish off what he did."
But months later, Fry and Kubasta's diligence paid off.
The Santa Clara County crime lab extracted human DNA from the swab. It was then matched through the state's database of samples taken from anyone convicted of a felony and those arrested or charged with a homicide or sex offense. Ultimately, all information led to Easley, police and prosecutors said.
"It was the saving grace and one of those 'above and beyond' efforts," Kimber said of the police work. "It's what saved this case."
Easley was previously convicted of two sexual felonies in Solano County, according to court documents. He also was convicted of robbery in Contra Costa County. Now, as a third striker, he faces life in prison if convicted, said Santa Clara County prosecutor Michael Fletcher.
When San Jose police called detective J. Melville in Vallejo, he volunteered to find the suspect. Several hours later, he did. Easley lived near the police department.
Kimber told the victim, who had bought a two-pound steak for Maya after the attack.
The woman went home and cried. She hugged Maya.
"What," she said "would I do without you?"
Maya, the pitbull who fended off an attacker from her owner. Police found blood on the dog's head which led them to a registered sex offender in Vallejo.
This travesty is happening right now! These dogs have survived the alleged "dog fighters" and "their wounds" but it's unclear if they'll be able to escape with their lives from the 'Kill, Kill, Kill', one-track minded "Humane" Society! Perhaps if enough of us act quickly we can help convince the Sheriff that a change in plans might be in order before this becomes yet another tragic story of dogs destroyed by the Humaniacs that love to 'save them' by killing them all. They start out the story saying the "Humane" Society is going to evaluate the dogs, but then further along in the story the "Humane" Society spokeswoman says they'll all likely be killed even though the Sheriff says how nice and friendly and gentle all the dogs are, and the picture below proves it; none of the dogs shown look menacing AT ALL! The brindle dog looks to be in very good shape to me, and also how were the vick dogs, which he admitted were "fighting dogs", by and large able to be rehabilitated and these don't stand a chance because of some pat argument about them being "bred to be fighters"? Why should the dogs suffer at all, no matter their owners' actions? These are all lies and disinformation handed out as though this "Humane" Society is some authority, when these comments clearly show they are not. I'm surprised the "Humane" Society didn't try to talk the Sheriff into believing the beagle was a "bait dog" too, since it seems beyond them that any of these dogs could just be their pets.
I urge all of you to email, call or fax this Sheriff and ask that he find an independent, unbiased Agency to evaluate the dogs because the "Humane" Society is notoriously kill crazy with regard to pit bulldogs. I just can't believe how obvious they're being in their rush to kill these dogs, some of which are puppies. Of course the adults shouldn't be destroyed simply because they happen to be dog aggressive either! Also, how about the men who are accused be considered innocent until they're proven guilty and not have their property precipitously destroyed.
This is truly a potential tragedy, but maybe if enough of us appeal for justice he'll reconsider. Please make POLITE requests for review and change of evaluating agency to:
Stoddard County Sheriff Carl Hefner PO Box 319 Bloomfield, MO 63825 573-568-4654 573-568-4654 fax
Tenn. man arrested after Missouri dogfighting arrests
By JIM SALTER Associated Press Writer ST. LOUIS
Officials at the Humane Society of Missouri are evaluating 26 dogs rescued from an alleged dogfighting ring to determine if they can be rehabilitated or if they will have to be euthanized.
An anonymous tip alerted authorities in southeast Missouri, who staked out a rural home near Dexter, Stoddard County Sheriff Carl Hefner said Monday. Three people were arrested, including a Tennessee man.
Deputies moved in as participants gathered Saturday night for what authorities said would be a fighting event. The property owner, 29-year-old Jamie Sifford of Dudley, Mo., was arrested, along with Jessey Short, 30, of Cape Girardeau, and Curtis Pickering, 28, of South Fulton, Tenn.
All three were charged with felony dogfighting. Sifford was also charged with possession of a controlled substance and possession of drug paraphernalia. Sifford may face additional charges for violating probation, Hefner said. All three remain jailed Short and Pickering in lieu of $125,000 bail, Sifford without bail.
The dogs consisted of 25 pit bulls and one beagle. Authorities believe the beagle was not involved in fighting. Hefner said the animals had several bite wounds, new and old, but they believe the men involved were relative novices.
"This is the first thing like this we've ever dealt with," Hefner said.
The dogs, Hefner said, were surprisingly gentle considering they were bred to fight.
"They weren't aggressive to us at all," he said. "You could walk up to them and they'd jump up and lick you. But whenever they'd make eye contact with a dog chained next to them, they'd get aggressive toward each other."
Humane Society spokeswoman Jeane Jae said all 26 dogs will survive their wounds, but because they were bred to be fighters, will likely be euthanized.
"It's very sad the dogs have to suffer for the actions of humans," she said.
The arrests comejust months after dogfighting was thrust into the national spotlight with the arrest and guilty plea of Atlanta Falcons quarterback Michael Vick. Tim Rickey, director of rescues and investigations for the Humane Society of Missouri, said the Vick case has raised awareness of the crime and led to some tips but few specifics.
"People are reporting generic tips," he said. "It takes quite a bit to get to one of these properties when the fights are happening."
In the Stoddard County case, Hefner said authorities watched as the three participants gathered with their dogs, then moved in before fighting actually occurred.
The fights were staged in abarn in a rural area near Dexter, about 160 miles south of St. Louis. Inside, investigators found a dogfighting ring, a bloodstained tarp, a device to weigh the dogs and equipment used to train them weighted sleds that the dogs pulled to build muscle, collars weighing as much as 20 pounds to build neck muscle, treadmills. Also found were medical supplies used to treat the injured animals. ...
Here is a picture from another news story where it can be clearly seen that at least one is a puppy and that another is so friendly it is jumping up on the guy and looks to me to be wagging it's tail:
From this story: "The picture in the center on the bottom is of a treadmill used for endurance training with the dogs. This is an item designed specifically for dog fighting. The dog at left center was one of the youngest on the premises. He is shown nuzzling up to Stoddard County K-9 officer Andy Holden." https://www.dailystatesman.com/story/1285828.html
"Nuzzling". Can they possibly convince people that such an animal deserves to be destroyed simply because of its breed? Since when is a treadmill "designed specifically for dog fighting"? That is a blatant lie1 which probably also came from the "Humane" Society.
This is about the recent article alleging New York City is the ‘Dogfight Capital of the World"1. I can’t believe such an article was approved by an editor, let alone published. This article was an extreme disappointment full of baseless allegations and hearsay by paid informants and a convicted criminal(s). It lacked any merit or real informational value. The ‘Humane‘ Society (‘HSUS‘) has likely paid these informants to make the statements it's been claimed they have.
Just how and when did it become a fact that New York City is the ‘capital of professional dog fighting‘? Just last month the outgoing HSUS director claimed North Carolina was ‘central‘ and ‘pivotal‘2 to this activity. In reviewing the definition of the word central I see it is a singular term to which two jurisdictions geographically removed from each other cannot both occupy. Pivotal is also defined as being in the exact center of something or of crucial, vital or key importance3. That characterization of either locality is probably not accurate, but did serve to draw overly sensationalized attention to both the paper and this HSUS agenda item.
This Post reporter used nothing other than the word of criminals and a truly ‘notorious figure‘, who is a convicted criminal4,5, and former front man for ALF, an FBI-listed DOMESTIC TERRORIST organization6,7 (it doesn’t get more ‘dark, violent‘ and nefarious than that). He's currently working for a corporation that’s worth nearly $100,000,0008 (seven years ago, probably over $100 million by now) and with their own extremist agenda to pursue. These people have an agenda; which agenda includes ‘˜liberating’ all animals from humans. That means no pets, no food, no zoos, no mascots, no hunting, no animal use or ownership whatsoever in any form. They’ve chosen this as a first easy step towards that goal and this story gave them some undeserved credibility in those pursuits. Presenting baseless allegations by criminals as vetted fact has done serious journalism, your paper and the great American Pit Bull Terrier a huge disservice. This reporter allowed herself to become a HSUS puppet and the article seems to have been nothing more than ‘Humane‘ Society propaganda camouflaged as impartial reporting and reputable journalism.
A good reporter in search of truthful, accurate reporting would have checked the criminal record of these sources and informant(s), just as they did Mr. Reyes. I see no mention of the criminal histories of the people that were used as the main basis for the hearsay and innuendo reported as though it were factual journalism. S/he/they are likely to have a record just as lengthy as Mr. Goodwin’s, yet their monetarily motivated 'word' seems to have been the basis for this whole story. It’s all anonymous ‘investigators‘, ‘informants‘ and ‘sources‘, whom no doubt each have an agenda of their own they’re pursuing with these unfounded comments and accusations.
In June John Goodwin estimated the number of people involved in dog fighting in the US to be 20,0009, two months later in August another HSUS representative claimed it was 40,00010 and now in October I’ve seen the HSUS referenced in reports that are claiming as many as 100,00011, and even 400,00012. Clearly this organization will stretch and skew facts and figures to suit their needs at the moment. Please extrapolate the last figure for yourself. That would be 8000 dog fighters per state. This position, claimed by the ‘Humane‘ Society as ‘˜fact’ is untenable under any reasonable investigation and scrutiny. The article claimed 500 individuals in attendance at multiple events in New York City; even assuming that supposition as fact, how many rural states to do you think could possibly have even half that amount?
I notice Ms. Wolff reported a five hour fight ‘record‘ in the article, and yet just a few months ago another supposed ‘anti-cruelty expert‘ referred to these matches as ‘lasting up to 10 hours‘13? So which one is the truth? I tend to think neither. This is just further evidence that the HSUS has an operational pattern in which facts and figures are twisted and fabricated to further what appearance they deem necessary and/or desirable at the moment. The figures disseminated are changed at will to fit a particular article/reporter/situation and should not have be given any independent worth in these stories without corroboration by someone who is not a convicted criminal and/or whom is not being remunerated. This example along with those in the preceding paragraph are evidence of how little trust should be given to any further figures or ‘˜facts’ being offered by this group and its representatives for media consumption.
The HSUS and the article were sure to bring up ‘purses‘, so I think it would also have been applicable to have included information regarding the funds which the HSUS is soliciting from unwitting individuals who think they are helping to spay/neuter, shelter, feed and care for stray and abandoned animals when in fact the money is misappropriated for just this sort of extremist agenda and attack14. While it is certainly true that most Americans are not likely to be supporters of such things as were described in the article, I tend to believe that this situation has been stretched and sensationalized beyond reality and that most Americans put a priority on caring for unwanted pets before they would venture into this area, especially based solely on information and the word of convicted criminals and a domestic terrorist.
Neither the police nor ASPCA seem to have plans to charge the man mentioned in the story although I can only surmise that is exactly what Mr. Goodwin had in mind when prompting the writing of this article. It’s also pretty clear to me from the article that John Goodwin, acting as a representative of the HSUS, is annoyed that the city and its agents have not dropped everything and devoted their already stretched funds and manpower to do his bidding and pursue his/their agenda. The ASPCA actually cares for dogs, unlike the HSUS. They’re certainly a more appropriate organization to evaluate and proceed on any complaints the HSUS or anyone else has made about residents within their jurisdiction; they’re a duly sworn Law Enforcement Agency entrusted with a clear, defined, legitimate civic mission. Why has Ms. Wolff ignored all legitimate comment by them in pursuing factual information for these articles?
The HSUS operates not one single animal shelter, nor do they share any funding with local humane societies. In the words of Animal News Editors: ‘HSUS is an advocacy organization representing just itself.‘14 Many HSUS employees garner very hefty salaries as well as use their funds to pursue this extremist agenda by paying informants like those used here to ‘testify‘ as directed. In addition, a large portion of their resources are used to lobby government in pursuit of HSUS goals, which is ultimately the ‘abolition of all animal agriculture‘15. Mr. Goodwin was once a representative for the Anti-Fur group CAFT, where he said his methods were ‘very effective in traumatizing our targets‘15. This story and the broader agenda presented there seem also to be designed to achieve that exact end.
What should really have been written in this article is that the authorities are probably aware that Goodwin is a convicted criminal and terrorist and may feel that they need more than the word of such a man, or other men who likely have their own criminal histories to hide, before they could proceed with any legitimacy against citizens in this country. Goodwin has used the New York Post to further the HSUS/his agenda. New York City Law Enforcement is one of the best in the Nation. They work diligently to lower crime 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year and have done a respectable job of it since even before Mayor Bloomberg took office. Above all they know that it’s more important to address murder, rape and violent crime before they investigate the complaints of a convicted criminal and terrorist trying to eliminate all animal use and ownership. I have no doubt there is some level of professional dog fighting in the NYC area but highly doubt the claim that it’s the ‘Dog fighting Capital of the World‘, I think it’s not only untrue but just sensationalized HSUS propaganda.
With regard to the follow up New York Post story, I saw only happy, healthy looking, apparently well-socialized dogs in the pictures, both with their owner and other dogs.
In closing I’d like to say that I believe the Post, and Ms. Wolff specifically, owes all American Pit Bull Terrier owners, Mayor Bloomberg, all Police and ASPCA Officers, and ALL New Yorkers a public apology for this farce and tabloid-like fodder that was masqueraded as news.
Gamedogs.org was founded in 2004 and desires to promote positive action and images related to, about, on behalf of, or by Gamedogs and/or their owners. Gamedogs.org is dedicated to providing useful resources both for internet and real life caretaking of Gamedogs, their owners and admirers as well as defending the ownership and legal use of Gamedogs, including the American Pit Bull Terrier (APBT). Gamedogs.org also strives to educate owners, potential owners and the media about those who seek to limit and/or eliminate the great American Pit Bull Terrier, other Gamedogs and/or traditional animal use and ownership.
I wanted to write and tell you that I found your reporter's coverage of the Grime's theft case to be biased and a great disservice to impartial journalists that believe in the ethic of truthful, honest and unbiased reporting.
Today's headline should have read "Dog thief found guilty", as that is what she is and was found guilty of and is the fact of the matter and topic. Instead you allowed Mr. Ray to spin the 'truth' into her being an "advocate", much as he did in previous articles referring to the dog by the name given to him by the thief rather than his true owners.
It is not always easy as the owner of a pet to know when or what the right thing to do is, especially regarding euthanasia of a longtime pet, but if there is a question, it should be handled by proper authority and not vigilante extremists.
This woman CLAIMS to be an advocate, but she is really an extremist who has been convicted of stealing another person's pet. The likes of Ms. Grimes and her animal rights cohorts seek to ultimately eliminate all pet ownership that does not include the animal spending it's entire life indoors. They are attempting to accomplish this one little step at a time.
True dog advocates deal directly with pet owners and offer assistance when possible. They also encourage the keeping of animals for its lifetime. These people cared for Jake for nearly two decades, that is not the mark of some uncaring degenerates in the mind of anyone but an extremist. True dog advocates work within the Law, not circumvent and violate it.
From the beginning of time, dogs have been tethered, and continue to be so for NUMEROUS reasons. Perhaps the dog is not suited to a kennel (which by the way Ms. Grimes believes should also be illegal1), perhaps it is a rescue dog which one keeps on a chain instead of destroying (as I myself have done), perhaps the individual doesn't have the money to build an expensive, elaborate kennel system (should only the wealthy be allowed to keep pets?), perhaps the dog is used as a hunting or catch dog and is more suited outside and as we have seen recently with the ice and snow storms, it is far easier to reach and tend to a tethered dog than a kenneled one.
There is no evidence whatsoever that a tethered dog is any more unhappy, unhealthy or dangerous than any other dog. Any form of restraint can be abused. At what percentage do these extremists determine that lack of indoors human companionship becomes inhumane? The fact is they are just humanizing the dogs and projecting their own insecurities onto them.
The most dangerous animal is one that is not properly restrained by its OWNER. As long as the animal is cared for, the place of its keeping should be determined by the OWNER of the animal and provided it is fed, sheltered, watered and receives appropriate medical care when necessary it is no one else's business whether it lives 1% or 100% outdoors. If it is lacking any of the above it is for PROPER AUTHORITIES to deal with, not extremist vigilantes with publicity, bleeding-heart and fund raising agendas of their own.
It should not be some extremist or their group that defines pet ownership in America, or in Pennsylvania. I believe in traditional humane values regarding animals, but I cannot and do not support an extremist agenda which sanctions the theft of another's animals/property or restriction on the humane use, keeping and/or care of pets.
By referring to a convicted thief and criminal in the manner your reporter/organization has you've become a participant in that extremist agenda. You've glorified a woman who is now a criminal, convicted of a theft which the Mirror story is allegedly reporting upon.
Thank you for your time.
1 https://tammygrimes.blogspot.com/ ("founder and executive director ... dedicated to ending the chaining and penning of dogs")
Sent to: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
Gamedogs.org was founded in 2004 and desires to promote positive action and images related to, about, on behalf of, or by Gamedogs and/or their owners. Gamedogs.org is dedicated to providing useful resources both for internet and real life caretaking of Gamedogs, their owners and admirers as well as defending the ownership and legal use of Gamedogs, including the American Pit Bull Terrier (APBT). Gamedogs.org also strives to educate owners, potential owners and the media about those who seek to limit and/or eliminate the great American Pit Bull Terrier, other Gamedogs and/or traditional animal use and ownership.
Gainesville, FL. 10/13/07 - Hundreds of thousands of dollars were raised along with the public perception of what has lately been among America's most disfavored breeds, the American Pit Bull Terrier.
Hundreds of people gathered this Saturday to walk for life and raise money for the American Heart Association. In conjunction with the Florida Council on Crime and Delinquency, over $172,000 was raised for the American Heart Association, with over $2,000 raised by those walking with their pet and mascot, an American Pit Bull Terrier named Beaner.
These events show how average Americans can open their hearts, minds and wallets and help when needed; those that benefited from this event included Heart Disease sufferers, the participants and the public image of this once revered breed, the American Pit Bull Terrier.
Gamedogs.org was founded in 2004 and desires to promote positive action and images related to, about, on behalf of, or by Gamedogs and/or their owners. Gamedogs.org is dedicated to providing useful resources both for internet and real life caretaking of Gamedogs, their owners and admirers as well as defending the ownership and legal use of Gamedogs, including the American Pit Bull Terrier (APBT). Gamedogs.org also strives to educate owners, potential owners and the media about those who seek to limit and/or eliminate the great American Pit Bull Terrier, other Gamedogs and/or traditional animal use and ownership.
It seems the ASPCA was not any more thrilled than I was about the NY Post article and they pretty much called most of lacking fact as well as merit.
A big thank you to the contributor that sent this in to me.
ASPCA Refutes Media Reports Citing New York City As The ‘Dogfight Capital of the World‘
NEW YORK, October 15, 2007’The ASPCA® (The American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals®) today refuted recent media reports claiming that New York City is the ‘Dogfight Capital of the World.‘
‘The ASPCA was founded 141 years ago specifically as a law enforcement agency to enforce New York City’s animal cruelty laws,‘ said ASPCA President & CEO, Ed Sayres. ‘Since then, our scope has grown considerably; and today, we are on the forefront of investigating and fighting animal cruelty not just in New York, but all around the country.
‘There is no credible evidence that New York City is the ‘˜underground capital of dog fighting,’ as stated in an article in yesterday’s New York Post, which attributes much of the information in the article to a source outside the ASPCA,‘ continued Sayres.
‘In fact, what surprises me is that the story cites only anonymous informants and Web sites. Further, the ‘˜lead’ that was purportedly supplied to the ASPCA in 2006 was, in fact, looked into by our Humane Law Enforcement (HLE) agents, but when they asked for further, credible, information, none was supplied.‘
Contrary to the Post’s story, the ASPCA rarely sees arrests for dog fighting and related activities; as such, it believes that organized dog fighting is not widely prevalent in the area. On occasion, ASPCA HLE agents have witnessed the peripheral effects and elements of dog fighting, which include injured dogs and dog fighting paraphernalia’but certainly nothing on the scale implied by the recent news story. Reports of such findings are common in many major cities, including Philadelphia, Boston, Detroit, Chicago, New Orleans, San Francisco and elsewhere.
Dog fighting is a felony offense in 48 states, and the ASPCA supports rigorous investigation into all credible claims of anyone associated with dog fighting. Because of its depth and breadth of expertise in animal cruelty, the ASPCA often assists in animal cruelty investigations around the country, by providing expertise on prosecuting animal cruelty and effective use of veterinary forensic assistance in dogfighting and other animal cruelty cases. Most recently, the ASPCA assisted federal investigators in the case against Michael Vick, and also led the behavior evaluations of 49 pit bulls seized from Vick’s property.
The ASPCA’s humane law enforcement agents are peace officers who have authority to make arrests and execute search warrants, a power that is unique among all other animal welfare organizations. ‘As with any such authority, this must be balanced and applied with great professionalism and responsibility,‘ said Sayres.
The ASPCA Humane Law Enforcement Department upholds and enforces New York State animal cruelty laws in the five boroughs of New York City and in 2006 investigated 4,191 cases of suspected animal cruelty that resulted in 103 arrests and 295 seized animals. However, the ASPCA does not investigate animal cruelty in New York City to the exclusion of city, state and federal governmental agencies and often works in tandem with other law enforcement entities throughout the state.
‘Dog fighting is barbaric and unacceptable in a humane community,‘ said Sayres, ‘but to conclude that New York is the dog fighting capital of the world, based on nothing more than conjecture, rumor and anonymous informants, without providing credible evidence, and to suggest that all New York authorities have turned a ‘˜blind eye’ to this illegal activity, when failing to provide such authorities with credible leads, is ridiculous.‘
An Open Letter to the Editor of the New York Post From Ed Sayres, president & CEO, ASPCA
NEW YORK, October 22, 2007’
Dear Editor,
For the second time in two weeks, Elizabeth Wolff (most recently in conjunction with James Fanelli) has written articles on dog fighting that reek of bias, innuendo and point the finger of sloppiness and callous disregard at the ASPCA (‘Dogfight Capital of the World,‘ October 14; and ‘Dogfighting Lair,‘ October 21, with James Fanelli). Despite being given information by many of my staff over the past several weeks, Ms. Wolff seems unable to distinguish fact from fiction, misquoting ASPCA personnel and completely misrepresenting the true state of dog fighting in New York City.
Contrary to Ms. Wolff’s October 14 article, neither the ASPCA nor the city of New York has seen arrests for organized dog fighting and related activities in recent history (in at least the last 10 years); therefore, we believe that organized dog fighting is not widely prevalent in the area. We communicated this to Ms. Wolff on several occasions, but she seems bent on insinuating otherwise. On occasion, our agents have certainly seen the peripheral effects and elements of dog fighting, which include injured dogs and dog fighting paraphernalia’and we react accordingly’but certainly nothing on the massive scale the Post implies.
For a city that the Post describes as the ‘dogfight capital of the world,‘ your earnest reporter has located only one alleged dogfighter, who in yesterday story is shown in a photo apparently lavishing affection on his dogs. If New York City were the dog fighting capital of the world, surely there would be more evidence, or at least more complaints, of this brutal activity’but again, our officers do not receive many reports of suspected dog fighting activities.
It is interesting that yesterday’s article does not quote anyone from the Bronx District Attorney’s office which, according to the Post, is investigating Reyes, nor anyone from the Humane Society of the United States’ National Animal Fighting Task Force, which apparently provided Ms. Wolff with the information that Reyes ‘˜operates the city’s top dog fighting ring.’
Last week, Ms. Wolff’s story cited anonymous informants and Web sites that we have repeatedly said are not credible. Yet both stories end with statements attributed to the ASPCA’s Joe Pentangelo, assistant director of our Humane Law Enforcement division, who was called out in the more recent article as ‘confirming‘ that the HSUS ‘tipped them off to the Big Apple kennel last year.‘ This is completely inaccurate. When Ms. Wolff asked Mr. Pentangelo if he had heard of Ralph Reyes, he responded ‘no.‘ When she asked him if he had ever heard of Big Apple Kennels, he responded ‘yes.‘ This attribution is not only incorrect, but oddly out of place, since information for both Ms. Wolff’s articles was supplied by sources outside of the ASPCA. Further, the ‘lead‘ that was characterized as a ‘tip-off,‘ purportedly supplied to the ASPCA in 2006, according to last week’s article, was, in fact, looked into by ASPCA personnel, but when they asked for further, credible information, none was supplied. We also provided this information to Ms. Wolff, but she apparently chose not to print it’as she chose not to reference practically all the information we provided her.
For the past several months we have answered Ms. Wolff’s numerous questions to the best of our ability while maintaining the appropriate boundaries of professional responsibility by a law enforcement agency. Yet she persists in implying that the ASPCA has fallen short of its law enforcement responsibilities. The fact is, we cannot divulge information about persons or places that may/may not be the subject of an investigation unless we make an arrest, or the case is closed and is public information. This would be irresponsible and undermine the integrity with which we conduct our cases’also a fact that we have repeated several time to Ms. Wolff, to no avail. As such, there seems to be no point in further communicating with her.
You have certainly provided Ms. Wolff an ample forum to broadcast her beliefs. I expect that you will do the ASPCA the same courtesy but this time, print the accurate facts I have provided to you two weeks in a row. As the country’s oldest animal welfare organization’one that was specifically founded as a law enforcement agency and is proud of its legacy’you owe this to us, as well as the New Yorkers we are so proud to serve.
This is about the recent article alleging New York City is the ‘Dogfight Capital of the World"1. I can’t believe such an article was approved by an editor, let alone published. This article was an extreme disappointment full of baseless allegations and hearsay by paid informants and a convicted criminal(s), lacking any merit or real informational value. The ‘Humane‘ Society (‘HSUS‘) has likely paid these informants to say what they have.
Just how and when did it become a fact that NYC is the ‘capital of professional dog fighting‘? Just last month the outgoing HSUS director claimed North Carolina was ‘central‘ and ‘pivotal‘2 to this activity. In reviewing the definition of the word central I see it is a singular term to which two jurisdictions geographically removed from each other cannot both occupy. Pivotal is also defined as being in the exact center of something or of crucial, vital or key importance3. That characterization of either locality is probably not accurate, but did serve to draw overly sensationalized attention to both the paper and this HSUS agenda item.
They used nothing other than the word of criminals and a truly ‘notorious figure‘, who is a convicted criminal4 and former front man for ALF5, an FBI-listed DOMESTIC TERRORIST organization6 7 (it doesn’t get more ‘dark, violent‘ and nefarious than that). He's currently working for a corporation that’s worth nearly $100,000,0008 (seven years ago, probably over $100 million by now) and with their own extremist agenda to pursue. These people have an agenda; which includes ‘˜liberating’ all animals from humans. That means no pets, no food, no zoos, no mascots, no hunting, no animal use or ownership whatsoever in any form. They’ve chosen this as a first easy step towards that goal and this story gave them some undeserved credibility in those pursuits. Presenting baseless allegations by criminals as vetted fact did serious journalism, and the great American Pit Bull Terrier a huge disservice. This reporter allowed herself to become a HSUS puppet and the article seems to have been nothing more than ‘Humane‘ Society propaganda camouflaged as impartial reporting and reputable journalism.
It seems to me that a good reporter in search of truthful, accurate reporting would have checked the criminal record of these sources and informant(s). S/he/they are likely to have a record just as lengthy as Mr. Goodwin’s. I see no mention of the criminal histories of the people that were used as the main basis for the hearsay and innuendo reported there as though it were factual journalism. Yet, their monetarily motivated ‘word‘ seems to have been the basis for this whole story. It’s all anonymous ‘investigators‘, ‘informants‘ and ‘sources‘, whom no doubt each have an agenda of their own they’re pursuing with these unfounded comments and accusations.
In June John Goodwin estimated the number of people involved in dog fighting in the US to be 20,0009, two months later in August another HSUS representative claimed it was 40,00010 and now in October I’ve seen the HSUS referenced in reports that are claiming as many as 100,00011, and even 400,00012. Clearly this organization will stretch and skew facts and figures to suit their needs at the moment. Please extrapolate the last figure for yourself. That would be 8000 dog fighters per state. This position, claimed by the ‘Humane‘ Society as ‘˜fact’ is untenable under any reasonable investigation and scrutiny. The article claimed 500 individuals in attendance at multiple events in New York City; how many rural states to do you think could possibly have even half that amount?
Anyone else notice the five hour ‘record‘ mentioned in the article, and yet just a few months ago another supposed ‘anti-cruelty expert‘ referred to these matches as ‘lasting up to 10 hours‘13? So which one is the truth? I tend to think neither. This is just further evidence that the HSUS has an operational pattern in which facts and figures are twisted and fabricated to further what appearance they deem necessary and/or desirable at the moment. The figures disseminated are changed at will to fit a particular article/reporter/situation and should not be given any independent worth without corroboration of and by someone who is not a convicted criminal and/or whom is not being remunerated. I believe these examples show how much veracity should be expected in any further figures or ‘˜facts’ that are being offered for media consumption by this group and its representatives.
The HSUS and the article were sure to bring up ‘purses‘, so I think it would also have been applicable to have included information regarding the funds which the HSUS is soliciting from unwitting individuals who think they are helping to spay/neuter, shelter, feed and care for stray and abandoned animals when in fact the money is misappropriated for just this sort of extremist agenda and attack14. While it is certainly true that most Americans are not likely to be supporters of such things as were described in the article, I tend to believe that this situation has been stretched and sensationalized beyond reality and that most Americans put a priority on caring for unwanted pets before they would venture into this area, especially based solely on information and the word of convicted criminals and a terrorists.
The police seem to have no plans to charge the man mentioned in the story although I can only surmise that is exactly what Mr. Goodwin had in mind when prompting the writing of this article. It’s also pretty clear to me from the article that John Goodwin, a convicted criminal and terrorist, acting as a representative of the HSUS, is annoyed that the city has not dropped everything and devoted their already stretched funds and manpower to pursue his/their agenda. The ASPCA actually cares for dogs, unlike the HSUS. They’re certainly a more appropriate organization to evaluate and proceed on any complaints the HSUS or anyone else has made about residents within their jurisdiction; they’re a duly sworn Law Enforcement Agency entrusted with a clear, defined, legitimate civic mission.
The HSUS operates not one single animal shelter, nor do they share any funding with local humane societies. In the words of Animal News Editors: ‘HSUS is an advocacy organization representing just itself.‘14 Many HSUS employees garner very hefty salaries as well as use their funds to pursue this extremist agenda by paying informants like those used here to ‘testify‘ as directed. In addition, a large portion of their resources are used to lobby government in pursuit of HSUS goals, which is ultimately the ‘abolition of all animal agriculture‘15. Mr. Goodwin was once a representative for the Anti-Fur group CAFT, where he said his methods were ‘very effective in traumatizing our targets‘15. This story and the broader agenda presented there seem also to be designed to achieve that exact end.
Now, what should really have been written there is that the authorities are probably aware that Goodwin is a convicted criminal and terrorist and may feel that they need more than the word of such a man, or other men who likely have their own criminal histories to hide, before they could proceed with any legitimacy against citizens in this country. Goodwin has used the New York Post to further the HSUS/his agenda. New York City Law Enforcement is one of the best in the Nation. They work diligently to lower crime 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year and have done a respectable job of it since even before Mayor Bloomberg took office. Above all they know that it’s more important to address murder, rape and violent crime before they investigate the complaints of a convicted criminal and terrorist trying to eliminate all animal use and ownership. I have no doubt there is some level of professional dog fighting in the NYC area but highly doubt the claim that it’s the ‘Dog fighting Capital of the World‘, I think it’s not only untrue but just sensationalized HSUS propaganda.
In closing I’d like to say that I believe the NY Post owes all American Pit Bull Terrier owners, Mayor Bloomberg, all Police and ASPCA Officers, and ALL New Yorkers a public apology for this farce and tabloid-like fodder that was masqueraded as news.
Nashville, Tennessee To be Announced Contact: cj1355 [@broken] msn.com
McComb, MS Meet & Greet/Information Table Contact: pitbull [@broken] crazy8kennel.com
New Haven, CT Games/Education/Agility/Adoption Contact: bullybreedgurl [@broken] hotmail.com
Austin, TX City Hall Pit Bull Meet Up / Walk (2:00 p.m.) Contact: lzaidman [@broken] tejassec.com
I recommend Houston folks with all the "To Be Announced" events email each other and do one thing not a bunch of little ones. Also, I caution everyone to remember that this is meant to show a GOOD IMAGE of the breed. Do not bring out aggressive dogs, either to other animals or ESPECIALLY towards people! At the same time remember that there are enemies of the breed that will surveil these sort of meet ups and look to profile our dogs and their people in a negative way, so please use good sense in evaluating the people you talk to, both in making contact for these events and at the events themselves.
Heart Association and Pit Bulls' Image both get a boost from 5km Heart Walk in Florida
Here are some photos from some dedicated and positive APBT owners showing their dog in a great light and helping a good cause at the same time!
They did a fantastic job! he's just adorable in his little sweater Now folks, this is a GREAT thing, but please only bring out dogs to these type of events that are suited to such things, like this one is. if you bring out dogs that would be barking and taking shots at other dogs (let alone people!) it would go the opposite way in publicity, so please keep that in mind when being inspired by this story. There are many ways to help the APBT's cause, please find at least one that you and/or your dogs can do. If you need suggestions or want to help but don't know how - drop me an email, I can find something for you to do.
Here again we can see that they are just slowly chipping away on so many fronts at the freedoms so many americans take for granted and don't even consider when donationg to these organizatiions.
By JERÉ LONGMAN September 8, 2007
BATON ROUGE, La., Sept. 5 ’ Fans who are in town Saturday for Louisiana State’s home opener against Virginia Tech can get a glimpse of L.S.U.’s latest recruits ’ football players and a tiger mascot.
Mike VI, the L.S.U. Tigers’ mascot, inside his $2.9 million habitat at the university. He was acquired from an Indiana rescue center.
Mike VI, a 2-year-old Bengal-Siberian tiger who is expected to grow to 700 pounds, was acquired last month from an animal-rescue center in Indiana.
The tiger was placed on view last Saturday in a $2.9 million, 15,000-square-foot campus habitat equipped with a wading pool, a waterfall, scratching posts, air-conditioned sleeping quarters and around-the-clock care from the L.S.U. School of Veterinary Medicine.
‘He probably gets better medical treatment than most of us,‘ Sean O’Keefe, L.S.U.’s chancellor, said. ‘He’s one charmed cat.‘
That is a widely held view here, where football and a live tiger are seen as essential to the character of the state’s flagship university. But not everyone agrees. The university and the state are on the skirmish lines of a growing fight waged by animal-rights groups, lawmakers and courts to bar the use of animals as live mascots, for staging fights or even in certain types of sporting equipment. Perhaps never before have animals been so prominent on the sports landscape.
When L.S.U.’s previous mascot died in May of kidney failure at age 17, representatives of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals asked the school not to get another live tiger. PETA argued that tigers need to roam over hundreds of miles, not square feet, and that wild animals become stressed in stadiums filled with tens of thousands of people.
Meanwhile, in June, Louisiana became the 50th state to ban cockfighting. In July, the California Supreme Court effectively prohibited the sale of soccer shoes made from kangaroo hides. And the National Basketball Association continues to experiment with synthetic materials for its basketballs.
Public sensitivity about the treatment of animals has been acutely evident in the past year, with the outpouring of grief after the death of the 2006 Kentucky Derby champion Barbaro and the national outrage aimed at the N.F.L. quarterback Michael Vick after he acknowledged his involvement in dogfighting.
‘These are manifestations of increasing concern about well-being and the ethic that if you are going to use animals, there should be a compelling reason,‘ said Wayne Pacelle, the chief executive of the Humane Society of the United States.
Referring to cockfighting and dogfighting, he said: ‘The idea that cruelty to animals is wrong has become a bedrock principle in American culture.‘
Twenty-five or 30 years ago, the news media and law enforcement officials might have looked the other way at an athlete involved in dogfighting, said Jay Coakley, an emeritus professor of sports sociology at the University of Colorado at Colorado Springs.
‘The sheriff may not have made a bust, or may have tipped him off and given him chance to cover up his tracks,‘ Coakley said.
In 1992, Jackie Sherrill, then the football coach at Mississippi State, got off with an apology and a warning after he had a bull castrated to motivate his players for a game against Texas, whose mascot is a longhorn steer named Bevo.
Public attitudes appear to have changed since then. Louisiana State Senator Arthur J. Lentini of Metairie, a New Orleans suburb, led the effort in Louisiana to ban cockfighting, in which roosters are fitted with spikes for slashing duels. Some Louisiana legislators said that cockfighting was a Cajun tradition and a rural economic lifeline.
Lentini said, ‘I felt it was very detrimental to the image of this state to be the only remaining state that permitted this activity in which animals are hurt for the amusement and wagering of human beings.‘ The ban takes effect in August 2008.
Last year, the soccer star David Beckham switched from soccer shoes made from kangaroo skin to a synthetic alternative after a campaign by animal-rights groups. In July, the California Supreme Court banned the sale of kangaroo-skin shoes in settling a lawsuit.
Response to the court decision has been mixed. While animal-rights groups celebrated, officials in Australia protested, saying that kangaroos are no longer endangered and need to be culled for proper conservation. A bill that would permit products made from kangaroo hides is pending in the California Legislature.
‘Consumers should not be intimidated by the scare tactics of extremists who have a long-term agenda of banning the use of nonendangered animal products,‘ Warren Truss, Australia’s trade minister, said in a statement after the court ruling.
The Vick case, too, has come to be viewed by some in a more nuanced way. Vick, who has been suspended by the N.F.L. and faces a possible prison sentence, has been widely criticized. Yet some observers say that Vick has been subjected to greater outrage and punishment than players who have committed violence against people in shootings, incidents of domestic violence or fatal traffic accidents.
The L.S.U. case represents perhaps PETA’s most visible attempt to dissuade universities from using live mascots. L.S.U. has kept live tigers since 1936. About three dozen schools keep live mascots. Others have discontinued the practice as being inhumane or too costly for appropriate care.
Southeastern Louisiana University, located east of here in Hammond, once housed a live lion during football season in an arrangement with the Audubon Zoo of New Orleans. The arrangement ended in 1972 when the university, which lacks a veterinary school on campus, realized it could not provide suitable care, Christina Chapple, a Southeastern spokeswoman, said.
‘Everybody was excited, then the reality of keeping a live animal on campus set in,‘ Chapple said. ‘We weren’t set up to handle that.‘
When L.S.U.’s previous tiger mascot died, PETA sent a letter to the school saying that large carnivores ‘suffer extremely‘ in captivity because they are denied the opportunity to engage in natural behaviors such as running, climbing, hunting, establishing territory and choosing mates. Most universities and all major professional teams use costumed humans, not live animals, as mascots, PETA said.
‘Keeping wild animals in captivity is cruel,‘ Lisa Wathne, a PETA captive exotic animal specialist, said in an interview. ‘As grandiose as Mike’s expensive habitat may look, it is inadequate for a tiger. The whole idea of carting this animal to a sporting event with screaming people is stressful to any wild animal.‘
Previously, PETA and other animal-rights groups criticized the conditions in which Baylor University kept a pair of black bear mascots. In 2005, the university opened a $1 million upgraded habitat. That same year, the University of South Carolina ignored PETA’s request that it stop using Gamecocks as a nickname, given that cockfighting is illegal in the state.
Cockfighting is ‘certainly not condoned by the university,‘ Russ McKinney, a South Carolina spokesman, said in an e-mail message. He said the school had a strong connection to the term Gamecock, which was the nickname given to a leader of the state’s resistance to the British during the Revolutionary War.
In L.S.U.’s written response to PETA, O’Keefe, the chancellor, said that instead of being cruel and inhumane, the school’s habitat was ‘far better‘ than most found in zoos. (At the Indiana rescue facility, Mike VI shared with four other tigers a 20-foot-by-30-foot outdoor cement enclosure and never saw grass, Dr. David G. Baker, the L.S.U. veterinarian who is the tiger’s caretaker, said in an interview.)
O’Keefe, noting that tigers were endangered, said that efforts to preserve the exotic cats ‘will need to be conducted in captivity.‘ The campus enclosure will allow Mike VI to roam, O’Keefe said, while keeping the animal safe from injury, poachers and infection. L.S.U. also plans to build an education center to inform the public about global conservation issues, he said.
The tiger will not enter the football stadium for at least L.S.U.’s initial two home games, Baker said. First, it will attend soccer games in a portable cage to become acclimated to smaller crowds. When it does attend football games, the tiger will not be sedated or forced into its trailer, Baker said. And no one will be allowed to bang on the trailer or poke the animal in an attempt to make it roar, he said.
The previous tiger mascot ‘was obviously not stressed‘ in the stadium, Baker said, seeming almost to fall asleep as it circled the field. The mascot always leaves the stadium before kickoff.
Referring to PETA officials, Baker said, ‘According to them, humans don’t have the moral authority to eat, own, exhibit or experiment upon animals. I don’t share that religion.‘
Pro-Animal Groups Push Agenda on Capitol Hill By Jeff Golimowski CNSNews.com Senior Staff Writer July 31, 2007
Washington (CNSNews.com) - A woman with short hair and glasses stands on a chair in a small meeting room on the first floor of the Rayburn House Office Building on Capitol Hill. She's reading off the names of states and senators, directing dozens of people to meetings starting at 11 AM.
When she's through, most people listening leave to start their lobbying efforts. The rest converge on a table of food provided by the natural and organic grocery store Whole Foods.
Monday was the last day of the annual Taking Action for Animals Conference. After a weekend featuring speakers and group gatherings, this day is designated for lobbying.
"It's a very pragmatic and mainstream effort to encourage change in society to protect animals," said Nancy Perry, vice president of governmental affairs for the animal protection group, the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS).
Conference attendees lobbied on behalf of four bills in particular: The House Agricultural Appropriations Bill, a provision of which would attempt to ban the slaughter of horses for human consumption; the Pet Safety and Protection Act, which would restrict the sourcing of dogs and cats used in laboratory research; the Dog and Cat Fur Prohibition Act, which would require all fur products to be labeled with the source of its fur; and the Farm Animal Stewardship Purchasing Act, which would stop the government from buying products derived from animals kept in inhumane conditions.
The HSUS has come under fire from conservative and industry groups as a "radical" animal rights organization, but Perry said the group's legislative agenda demonstrates its moderate credentials.
"These are just not radical ideas, they're mainstream ideas," she said. "It speaks volumes about where we are as an organization."
Perry and most of the groups represented at the conference went out of their way to distance themselves from extremist animal liberation groups that have resorted to violence to promote their cause.
Carole Baskin, director of two animal protection organizations, said extremists are making it more difficult for those wanting to help animals to work within the system.
"It is a challenge because when you have one bad person, you tend to all get painted with the same brush," she said. "That's like saying every Christian is a member of the KKK."
But National Animal Interest Alliance Director Patti Strand said the weekend's gathering in Washington is a prime example of a radical animal rights agenda. Strand's group is an animal welfare organization that works with industry groups and stands against what it considers extremism on both sides of the animal rights debate.
Strand said she considers the HSUS to be extremist.
"They wear business suits. They're articulate. They're fairly well-educated. They avoid the sort of in-your-face protests," said Strand. "So they're able to move the thinking, public opinion incrementally in the direction of radical change in some cases."
David Martosko, director of research at the food industry funded Center for Consumer Freedom, was even less flattering to those attending the conference.
"They're entitled to lobby just like everybody else" he said. "But we trust our elected representatives to recognize the tinfoil hat brigade when they see it."
Martosko said the legislative agenda being pushed by the HSUS is anything but mainstream. He considers there to be little difference between the controversial People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals and the HSUS as far as their end goals.
"When they use the word 'humane,' that's code for vegetarianism," said Martosko. "They're not lobbying against dog fighting up there. They're lobbying to do away with hog agriculture and to outlaw veal and foie gras ."
Throughout our history, Buckeye Firearms Association has worked to expose organizations that would deny our rights and freedoms, but who operate in such a manner that unsuspecting gun-owners or sportsmen might be fooled. The American Hunters and Shooters Association is one such group. Another, larger and much older organization, is the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS).
HSUS has been on the scene for many years working to outlaw sportsmen activities such as trapping and hunting. They are the largest, best organized and best financed anti-hunting organization in America. They have aggressively merged with or acquired other smaller organizations such as The Fund For Animals and The Doris Day League. Increasingly the anti-hunters who would deny our rights are uniting under one very large and very dangerous umbrella.
They are a "wolf in sheep's clothing" because their very name confuses many people into thinking they are the same as local humane societies, which rescue animals and operate shelters. HSUS operates no animal shelters. They further play on the unsuspecting public through the sales of calendars with photos of cute dogs and cats. Many people, including some who hunt, "feel" they are doing the right thing by buying the calendars or other merchandise without knowing the true agenda of HSUS. They are masters at disguising their true identity and mission.
Their size, an income of almost $125 million, an operating budget well over $90 million, and the ability to bring sister organizations under their umbrella makes them the strongest threat to sportsmen's ability to hunt, trap and fish today. But it is not just size that matters. Their membership and volunteers are never afraid to take the fight to the courts or the public. Unlike many gun owners and sportsmen, they don't spend time preaching to the choir. They are taking their message to local governments, public forums, and especially to the education of youth today. They leave no stone unturned in their efforts to eliminate the hunting, trapping and fishing heritage of sportsmen.
Just as we must fight the anti-self defense and anti-gun organizations, so must sportsmen fight the anti-hunting organizations led by HSUS. We need to stick together whether you currently hunt, are a trap shooter or handgun competitor. Fortunately there are some great partners leading the fight against HSUS and anti-hunting organizations. National organizations including the NRA and the US Sportsmen Alliance are leading efforts to combat HSUS.
Some ask, is this a gun issue? Yes, it is very much a gun issue, even if you do not hunt. If the HSUS could end hunting today, what does it mean to gun owners? Certainly the "sporting use" of firearms would be diminished and the anti-gunners would be emboldened by such success. Additionally, HSUS would need some cause to continue their existence and entry into the anti-gun arena could provide such an opportunity. They certainly will not fade away.
Others suggest that the anti-hunting community is on the retreat with the conviction of animal rights activists as domestic terrorists. Never underestimate the power of the opposition. HSUS claims 10 million members and constituents. That is about 2.5 times greater than the NRA membership. Charity Navigator gives them a 4-star rating with a capacity for growth and over $200 million in net assets as of 12/2005. (Editor's note: Charity Navigator rates charities primarily on financial management and program strength. They do not recommend on good or bad charities. The US Sportsmen Alliance is Charity Navigator rated as 5-star, which is the highest rating. Check them at www.charitynavigator.org)
HSUS is huge in terms of assets, fund-raising capabilities and memberships. Fortunately they have not effectively brought those forces to bear on legislation. That is only a matter of time. Meanwhile they continue to fool people about their true agenda and are stockpiling assets.
Outdoor writer and hunter education instructor Larry S. Moore is a Region Leader for Buckeye Firearms Association and winner of the 2005 USSA Patriot Award
I have had this sitting in my inbox for a few months now. I've been a tad slow getting updates done, but I'm moving now! So while this may seem a bit dated you can see how the HSUS is always looking for some profit for themselves and their extremist agenda, and will use any sad story to do so, no less than three times in eight paragraphs here:
The Humane Society of the United States August 20, 2007
Sign our virtual thank you card for the U.S. Attorneys in the Vick case: https://community.hsus.org/campaign/da_thank_you/wi8xx(edited out working link)xx1iw68tm? Make a special gift to our Animal Cruelty Response and Reward Fund: https://secure.hsus.org/01/cruelty_response_fund/nWpaa(edited out working link)1boOs?source=xxxx ********************************
Dear Friend,
Today, Michael Vick's attorney announced that Vick has apologized and is taking full responsibility for his actions in relation to federal dogfighting charges. When Vick pleads guilty in court, a case that has jolted the conscience of a nation will have reached something of a conclusion.
But our work is far from over.
I encourage you now to sign our virtual thank you card for U.S. Attorney Chuck Rosenberg and his staff, who have prosecuted this case and helped bring the tragedy of animal fighting into the spotlight: https://community.hsus.org/campaign/da_thank_you/wi8(edited out working link)1iw68tm?
And I ask you to help us bring other horrible crimes against animals to an end by making a special gift to our Animal Cruelty Response and Reward Fund. Click here to donate: https://secure.hsus.org/01/cruelty_response_fund/nWp_zM(no working links for extremist dog killers!)s?source=xxxx
The Humane Society of the United States has charted an increase in law enforcement activity since the Vick indictment, with at least 32 animal fighting rings broken up in 15 states in just the last month alone. Vast numbers of other cases, however, need attention -- and to that end, we've doubled our standard reward to $5,000 for information leading to the arrest and conviction of dogfighters.
Our phones are ringing off the hook with requests for help by law enforcement officials, who often want our expertise in both investigating these crimes and coordinating the logistics involved in rescuing large numbers of animals from abusive situations.
In fact, our Animal Cruelty Response and Reward Fund was created to make this work possible. In addition to enabling us to offer rewards, this fund helps underwrite our undercover investigations, our work assisting local law enforcement, our championing of tougher laws, and our highly trained response teams that rescue animals from large-scale cruelty cases.
We must not let the scourge of animal fighting continue after the publicity surrounding the Vick case recedes. Please thank the U.S. Attorneys today by visiting this link: https://community.hsus.org/campaign/da_thank_you/wi8(edited out working link)1iw68tm? Then, help make our cruelty response work possible for tomorrow. https://secure.hsus.org/01/cruelty_response_fund/nWp_zM(still no working links for extremist dog killers!)Os?source=xxxx ...
Wayne Pacelle President & CEO The Humane Society of the United States
Last week there was an opportunty for BSL history to be made and due to a complete lack of leadership, along with EBA and 89er ADBA Club money and support, it seems it may have been missed. I've tried to do what I can but ultimately this calls for more action than that which one person can effect alone. Here's the story:
I was watching the 10pm local news and the lead story1 was about a young man who was fined and whose dog was taken from him because it was a "pit bull mix" and supposedly in violation of city law (Del City, OK). Apparently a neighbor called in a tip to Animal Control while he was at work and they came right into his backyard and took the dog, as well as issuing him two 500$ tickets. I was surprised that the news reporter made no mention of the Statewide ban on restricting ownership of certain breeds and didn't even challenge the officer in the story on the overly broad language of the law, even disregarding it's illegality.
I called the News Station and spoke to a guy named Carter who sounded less than convinced and told me if I had any information I should email them. So I did. Here's the email that I sent:
Date:
Wed, 3 Oct 2007 20:37:50 -0700 (PDT)
From:
"pitchick" <pitchicksboards@(youknow).com>
Subject:
breed specific legislation prohibited by state law ATTENTION: Jordan Williams
To:
news[at]koco[dot]com
Greetings,
Per my discussion with Carter, please find enclosed specific reference to the Oklahoma State Statute prohibiting any legislation aimed at limiting one's ownership of any dog based strictly upon its breed or perceived breed (4 O.S. § 46 (B)). I am also including a link to Attorney General Drew Edmondson's opinion in July of this year affirming that municipalities may not identify specific breeds in restricting animal ownership within this state as "dangerous", using any method, direct or otherwise. I'm not quite sure why a reporter would not have investigated this prior to the article appearing on air. Media should challenge government when necessary, not just rubber stamp illegal proclamations because one is wearing a uniform.
Additionally I found it quite unbelievable that the Officer in the story said "it doesn't matter if they're a pit bull or not" while in the same sentence claiming the veracity of that portion of the illegitimate ordinance. I was just as surprised that Mr. Williams didn't challenge such a contradiction of their own statements.
Last, I would like to be put in contact with the young man profiled in your story this evening, if possible. I believe he was identified only as "Jason". You may pass on this email address or my phone number XXX-XXXX. My number is private so I share it only for that purpose or for your own follow up on this story.
Thank you, (my real name)
REFERENCE:
B. Potentially dangerous or dangerous dogs may be regulated through local, municipal and county authorities, provided the regulations are not breed specific. Nothing in this act shall prohibit such local governments from enforcing penalties for violation of such local laws.
Re: Fwd: breed specific legislation prohibited by state law ATTENTION: Jordan Williams
From:
"Jordan A Williams" <JAWilliams@(hearst).com>
Date:
Thu, 4 Oct 2007 14:36:11 -0500
(my real name) -
Thanks so much sharing this information with us. I spoke with the Attorney General's office this afternoon, and it is their opinion that state statute supersedes Del City's law. You're right. The ordinance is out of date and out of compliance with state law.
I'm in the process of sharing that information with Del City leaders.
I'll keep you posted.
Thanks, Jordan
Jordan Williams Reporter Eyewitness News 5, KOCO-TV 405.478.6609 (Direct) 405.475.5252 (Main) jawilliams@(hearst).com
So, during this time I also contacted a past president of the 89er club and also the EBA Treasurer Joan Morrison, who happens to live in Oklahoma, by both phone and forwarding these emails and including the Midwest City and Del City laws2 in word documents as well. I also received a phone call from the reporter and offered a bit more information that I had gathered from my phone conversation with Ms. Morrison regarding another woman that I was told is challenging the law after being ticketed and fined last year in the same city. I've always heard good things about Joan and had the pleasure of meeting her and her husband at last year's dog show. After receiving Jason's (the young man whose dog was confiscated) phone number from Mr. Williams I also contacted him and gave him what information and encouragement I could, including passing along Ms. Morrison's phone number, for which I had gotten her permission to do.
Re: breed specific legislation prohibited by state law
Date:
Thu, 4 Oct 2007 17:57:47 -0500
To:
"pitchick" <pitchicksboards@(youknow).com>
(my real name),
I think when the current case against Del City is finally settled - it's been in the courts almost a year now and that isn't unusual ‘“ Del City (hopefully) will back down. If the guy has a place for his dog to go, he can just wait out the storm. I don't know if EBA would want to fund another case in the same town when one is currently pending. We may have to put more money into that one. ADBA did not provide any financial assistance for this case and they weren't asked to at this time.
Joan
On Oct 4, 2007, at 2:58 PM, pitchick wrote: > pitchick <pitchicksboards@(youknow).com> wrote:
>> https://www.koco.com/news/14268634/detail.html >> >> I tried to look for him in the phonebook. the only jason (his last name) was >> disconnected and there's a shit load of j. xxxxx's. no email back >> from koco either, no surprise eh. >> >> I thought this could be a good test of the law, which I looked up for >> midwest city and del city. they've tried to evade the state >> prohibition by never mentioning 'dangerous' in their laws but I think >> they would probably still be struck down if a serious challenge was >> waged, as why else would they ban such a breed and one lists them >> right after any animal with a poisonous bite, lol. Maybe the kid >> could contact the AG and see if he would act against the city on >> behalf of the state. if you still have any decent friends that are >> officers in the club maybe they could contact the AG in an Amica >> capacity. maybe someone should contact the EBA (or hank greenwood >> maybe) and see if they would hire a lawyer to try and handle it? I >> doubt it, but maybe. >> Just some thoughts.
Right after I had sent that I received the reporter's reply (above) and forwarded it to them both, to which I got this reply:
To:
"pitchick" <pitchicksboards@(youknow).com>
From:
"Joan Morrison" <morrisons@xx(privacy)xx.com>
Subject:
From Joan Morrison
Date:
Thu, 4 Oct 2007 18:03:48 -0500
Hello again - I'm surprised beyond words that Channel 5 actually answered you and is (they say) contacting AGs office and Del City leaders.
The Casey Davis (attorney) represents our defendant and he was an assistant attorney general before he went into private practice. That is not a problem - he is on our side.
I'm glad the AGs office is sticking to their guns. I would think that at some time they (AG office) would have to come out and stand up for the state law.
They wouldn't represent our defendant, but they could weigh in. We'll just have to wait and see what happens.
Joan
Later that evening, as promised and passed on to Joan and the former 89er president, the same channel ran a lead off story again stating that in fact the State AG had confirmed their opinion that the Midwest City and Del City laws were in violation of State Law and would not be upheld in court3. I also called my informal 89er contact by phone that afternoon after receiving all the above infortmation but prior to the 10pm broadcast and gave her all the above plus a bit and said that I thought someone should get ahold of the current club leadership and organize a benefit for this young man's defense, post haste. Not only would it assist this guy, but it would assist the club's and dog's image as well as keep this in the public eye as the same TV Station could be called upon and would likely provide coverage of such an event. I was told she'd make some calls that afternoon and get back to me.
I've received no return call from anyone. I feel like our dogs have been let down on so many angles and fronts in this situation. Why are we 'just waiting and hoping Del City will back down'? Why are we (and by this I mean all ADBA registered APBT owners, as well as anyone who has ever contributed to the EBA either directly or by entry into an ADBA show, through representation by the EBA (whom has collected large sums of money for just such causes)) not taking a pro-active stance in a situation where we finally seem on firm ground, and have the backing of the State's Attorney and clear law on our side? Not only could the EBA lead a ground-breaking, precedent setting charge with a Class Action Suit against the City, but the club could have gained quite a bit of good, positive, mind-changing publicity for the dog's and the club in addition to helping out a young (military I believe) man who needs help and wants to fight this injustice to him and his dog.
The reporter went to Del City City Hall that day and pulled all the tickets issued for this ordinance since January 2006, he was given record of 135 tickets with a minimum fine of 500$ each. I can't believe I'm the only one that sees the huge opportunity and merit in the idea that if the young man in the story wants to join this other woman's case they could start a class action and the other 135+ (the law goes back to 1991 and those 135 are just the last couple years) would then be free (and I bet likely) to join them. This sort of action could bring enough financial recovery that not only would the previous victims of this unjust law be compensated (for out of pocket costs as well as loss of their pet!), but the city would then be forced to stop enforcing it, in such a way that only monetary pain can do to a civic entity. United, and with the backing of the EBA and 89er ADBA Club (and maybe ADBA???), we could be strong and win this fight. Do we not need a win, and a clear one, on this, more so now than ever?
The ADBA gives some percentage of each and every show entry fee to the EBA. Oklahoma is one of the largest clubs and shows in the US. I can only guess at the huge sum the EBA has taken in from this region over the years and last I heard the 89er club (a supposed non-profit) wasn't hurting for cash either. Here, now, we had an opportunity for that to be given back in what can only be seen as an open and shut, slam dunk just cause for the betterment of our dogs and their owners and they apparently don't want to spend the money. I hope folks keep this and that in mind in their future support for these groups.
My only personal regret in this whole situation has been that I didn't anticipate the "we're just trying to protect our citizens from dangerous pit bulls" argument the city manager made on air that next evening while speaking to the reporter for the follow up story. I would have rebutted it as I do now: I'm all for protecting citizens from dangerous dogs, but just as the State Law infers, any dog can be dangerous and legal entities should act against those that are proven so and not define the term by breed and unfairly burden and condemn innocent people and their pets.
The Companion Animal Protection Act looks at first blush to be something that might be worth supporting. It looks to attempt to force Animal Control Facilities to actually use their funds to help shelter, spay/neuter and care for displaced pets, first and foremost, which I believe is what most Americans desire be done with their tax and donations dollars. I will look into it further though before giving unqualified support, since many such Laws include bundled anti-APBT and/or Breed Specific language hidden in sheep's clothing. https://www.nokilladvocacycenter.org/capa.html
Hopefully justice will be a theme this season and this woman will face the punishment she deserves. I think a lot of the Peta propaganda about dog stealing may really be projection about their own terrorist type activities, stealing people's animals (property) because they don't agree with their use or ownership and many times their actions have indicated that they believe animals are 'saved' by killing them. After the Hinkle/Cook travesty1 I can only hope that justice will actually prevail next week and these extremists will be on notice that they cannot violate others' (property) rights with impunity. After that acquittal they may be thinking that no matter how extreme their actions they possess some sort of a get-out-of-felony-charges-free pass. It's my deepest and sincere hope that this will not be the case again.
Southampton County Circuit Court Criminal Division Case Number: CR07000258-00 Filed: 07/02/2007 Commenced by: Indictment Locality: COMMONWEALTH OF VA
Defendant: BENOIT, ANDREA FLORENCE
Sex: Female Race: White Caucasian DOB: 07/17/**** Address: CHESAPEAKE VA 23320 4836
Charge: GRAND LARCENY OF A DOG Code Section: 18.2-97 Charge Type: Felony
UPDATE: Trial postponed until 1/10/08 (Oddly, you can no longer do a name search and retrieve this case file so good thing I saved the case number here. ;) )
"A motorist who saw one of the women placing the dog in the van testified Tuesday that the scene "didn't look right," so he called Southampton County Sheriff's Deputy J.T. Cooke Jr., an animal control officer for the county. Cooke found the van a few minutes later and discovered his Walker hound in the back.
By the time he found the PETA van, Cooke had received a second call alerting him that a dog that was likely his had been spotted in the area. So when Cooke stopped the van, he asked the driver - Benoit - whether she had just picked up a dog. According to Cooke's testimony, they had the following conversation:
"No," she told him.
"You didn't just pick up a dog with zeroes on the side and 'JT' on the leg?" replied Cooke, who was in his sheriff's vehicle and uniform.
"Oh, you mean that dog. Yeah, it's in the back," Benoit responded.
Cooke saw that the dog no longer had on its tracking collar and asked Benoit where it was.
"I don't know what you're talking about," she told him.
The tracking collar was found near the side of the road where the dog was picked up. Benjamin (pitchick explains: Benoit's Attorney) said in court that the women had removed it. He said they were right to do so; otherwise they could have been charged with stealing the collar, he argued. ...
The hound was on its way home before they picked it up, prosecutor Steve Edwards said in his closing argument.
"The one thing that would have made it difficult to get the dog out of the county was left in the ditch," he said, referring to the tracking collar.
[1] Viewer discretion is advised! Some of these photos are very graphic! They show the actual crime scene photographs taken when Hinkle and Cook were caught taking animals from control facilities under false pretense of sheltering and saving them only to kill them all in the back of a van and dump their bodies in a supermarket dumpster, weekly. I can't imagine the ongoing outcry and use of such a scene to blanketly denigrate all dogmen if one of them had been found doing such a thing. https://www.petakillsanimals.com/petaTrial2.cfm
Once again, thanks to pressure and mischaracterizations by the "humane" society this innocent South Carolina couple has had years of their lives wasted, lost valuable property and were ultimately found guilty of nothing except upsetting some uber-sensitive AR types. Not only does this Chynoweth woman continue to beat this broken drum (they were found innocent for crying out loud!) but this resembles terrorism. They've caused free, innocent, law-abiding Citizens to be fearful and afraid to answer their phone or go to their own mailbox out of concern for physical harm thanks to the continued false and baseless accusations, intimidation and harassment promulgated by these extremist groups. This appears to me to be ongoing and if I was them I would consider a slander, libel and/or harassment suit, and perhaps even a restraining order, against the HSUS, and Chynoweth particularly, if they continue with this pattern of conduct, and perhaps even for what detrimental action has already been committed against them.
Couple acquitted in hog-dog fighting case say they're victims
CHESTER COUNTY, SC (WIS) - At a "hog-dog rodeo" - large crowds often assemble and even bet on dogs that are let loose on wild hogs. The vicious battles are a crime in South Carolina, but that wasn't always the case. Now, a couple once charged with hosting the fights is doing dog shows again - and believe it or not, the couple say they're the real victims.
On a hot and dry September day there's a dog show in Chester County. But the two people running it aren't exactly well liked in the area. Art Parker says, "People that used to be our friends, would go hunting with us - they're scared, won't hunt with us anymore."
Mary Luther shows WIS News 10's Dan Tordjman hate letters, even death threats.
Art says people write saying "that we ought to be ashamed of ourselves. If we really loved animals, we wouldn't be doing this."
They're targets of public outrage. Art Parker and Mary Luther have received hundreds of threats and found bombs in their mailboxes.
What could inspire such hate? Parker and Luther are accused of hosting a different kind of show in which hunting dogs are let loose in an enclosed ring, attacking wild feral hogs, some defenseless, with their tusks removed. The outcome is quite predictable.
Ann Chynoweth of the Humane Society of the US says, "That's absolutely no contest for the pig that suffers bloody mutilation and complete terror."
And for that, Luther and Parker had nearly 100 dogs seized. In 2004 the Humane Society of the US raided their property. The group also found several hogs.
So, it seemed the hammer was about to drop on Luther and Parker - both charged with animal cruelty. But three years later, Art Parker says, "We've been acquitted twice!"
They were acquitted once in South Carolina, and for Parker, again in Florida.
They beat the charges by calling the "hog-dogging" a simple training exercise for hunting - in which the dogs are immediately removed from the pig it's sunk its teeth into.
That's a far cry, the two argue, from animal cruelty. Art Parker says, "There's no such thing as a fight that lasts three seconds. I mean, it's just, that's not a fight. Animal fighting is a test of wills. There is no test of wills in a field trial. It's the dog performing his task. The one who does it the most proficiently gets the trophy."
Chynoweth says, "The outcome of the Parker case was obviously disappointing."
That's because the Humane Society says it had video showing Parker at hog-dog rodeos in South Carolina and Arizona.
WIS News 10 requested copies of both, but we only got one video which does not show Parker or Luther. The Attorney General's office says it can't release any video because it's still pursuing charges in the case against a few other people, including Parker's son.
Officials like Chynoweth still contend, "It's animal mutilation. It's animal fighting - all for the sick sense of entertainment."
"There are crowds there. There are kids there. People come and pay admission price. People bet on it. This is not for training. This is not for hunting."
But officials believe the main reason Parker and Luther beat the rap in South Carolina was because it's one of only two states in 2004 that didn't have a law explicitly prohibiting hog-dogging. Now it's outlawed under the Animal Fighting and Baiting Act.
"It's very clear that hog-dog fighting is exactly what Mr. Parker was participating in, organizing throughout the state and nationwide, which is illegal in South Carolina. So if it were to happen today, he'd be in jail," says Chynoweth.
Parker maintains his innocence, showing WIS News 10 some 60 dogs returned to him in worse shape, he says, than when they were taken.
And despite being acquitted, life has changed for Parker and Luther. In light of public outrage surrounding their case and the constant threats, the two say they're the victims now.
"I'm scared every day to answer the phone, go to the mailbox," says Luther.
Parker says, "You don't pick somebody out and then create a crime for them to have committed. Yeah, we're victims."
Parker and Luther say even before their case, they held dog conformation shows and they continue to do so. Those are the shows featuring dogs paraded around a ring and simply judged based on their looks.
But the two say they're no longer participating in any events involving dogs and hogs.
The AR-driven enforcement divisions so often overlook that many of these items they claim as "dog fighting paraphernalia" have perfectly legitimate purposes. Ever notice that if a lab or collie runs a treadmill it's for good health and/or maybe conditioning for a conformation show or field trial, but if it's a bulldog it must be for "training them to fight"?
Well it looks like a Wisconsin man got an impartial Judge this time who actually looked at the facts on their merits and not just the DA's resume building hype. He was acquitted of dog fighting charges.
Not Guilty of Dog Fighting Charges
September 28, 2007 By Emily Matesic
He said the dogs were his pets and that their scars came from rough play. A Brown County judge agreed, and found Kendale Smith not guilty of training pit bulls to fight.
Smith faced three felony charges after county officers seized three pit bulls and equipment believed to be used for dog fighting from his Allouez home last summer.
"I found the defendant Kendale D. Smith not guilty," The Honorable Judge Tim Hinkfuss ruled.
There was a look of relief on Smith's face and the judge found him not guilty of the most serious charges.
Judge Hinkfuss said his verdicts on the felony charges all came down to reasonable doubt. He said while the condition of the animals and the equipment found in Smith's home could've been used for dog fighting, there wasn't enough evidence proving it was.
The judge complimented attorneys on both sides of the case for their work this week, but he said more evidence was needed to convince him Smith was actually training the dogs to fight.
"The State presented a lot of evidence that could be used one way being legal versus illegal," Judge Hinkfuss said.
"There's no witness to any dog fighting event, there's no witness leading up to a dog fighting event," he went on. "There was no promotional flier, there was no cryptic message that perhaps could be interpreted that was preparing for a dog fight event."
Earlier this week, the shelter manager for the Bay Area Humane Society in Green Bay testified that Smith’s dogs didn’t show any signs of aggression. The two 4-month-old pit bulls were happy to see Smith when he came to visit, and the 4-year-old male wagged its tail when it saw him, she said.
I've heard that there was a town hall meeting in Atlanta a few days ago hosted by ESPN and that it was open to anyone from the public who wished to attend. My understanding is that the majority of citizens in attendance had a straw poll taken at the end of the meeting and that they overwhelmingly disapproved of dog fighting being illegal. I think most of those people (and the public in general1) recognize that this is not a crime against humans and that this is just a hot button, emotionally provocative issue; one which the hsus and peta have and will use as a stepping stone towards their ultimate and eventual goal of making any and all animal use illegal2.
The problem is that the "humane" societies have an enormous amount of funding and are organized to promote their position while those that sport animals (and by this I mean dog racing, pulling, hunting and/or fighting, horse racing, pulling, cockfighting and any other animal venture I cannot think of this moment) have no main, singular, organized lobby, no Animal Owners' Rights Political Action Committee. They're fragmented individuals pursued and persecuted by an organization that is very, very organized with a LOT of money, with a whole division dedicated to the singular purpose of their destruction. They've been funded by those that have sent in checks wanting to help care for animals (food, shelter, spay/neuter) and those folks have in many cases unwittingly funded a small group of extremists furthering a position with which most Americans do not agree.
Another problem in this issue is that the media, being driven by ratings rather than righteousness, have also used this subject to promote their own agendas (higher ratings=more advertising dollars) at the expense of liberty and fairness in my opinion. Like so many things in life, one needs only to follow the money trail.
After hearing of this recent town hall and the subsequent fallout I investigated a bit and found that the ESPN comment section about this issue is going overwhelmingly towards people allowing others to do as they wish with their own property or at the very least not condemn people found guilty to sentences exceeding those of child molesters and the like. Prisons in our society do not improve people and those found guilty of these minor (although emotionally inflammatory) crimes spend life-changing years of their lives living with and around real criminals. Decent people's lives and those of their families are ruined, often beyond repair. Find the debate HERE.
One big argument against vick in this situation has been how they killed the animals. Well, I will remind people that were this not illegal people could get care for dogs if and when needed without fear of prosecution. Many dogs would be put down in a more humane fashion when necessary. Also some dogs could be placed for adoption whereas now that would be nothing but evidence to possibly invite prosecution down the road. Those that live in populated areas cannot just shoot a dog without the noise drawing attention or without physical risk to other HUMANS and they cannot bring a vet to the show to assist in treatment or humanely euthanizing them either. Some say you cannot compare it to horse racing for just some of these reasons, but let's remember, horse racing is not (yet ) illegal and so they have such options available to them. I do not agree with the hanging or beating to death of dogs or any animals. However, first, it's not my business except as it might be evidence of mental instability which could lead to infringement upon my life, property and rights. That's for a psychiatrist to decide, perhaps as directed by a Court, but not by me, you or the "humane" society. Second, as I have said in the past, if not hidden by the secrecy of illegality many such things wouldn't happen, as when something is made illegal criminal-types and lesser strata overtake the good people that were once involved (look at abolition for just one example). Those behaving in such a manner could, and likely would, be ostracized for such actions were it not for the veil of secrecy placed over the entire realm due to it's currently unlawful status.
By typing these words I've likely been added to the hsus 'database', if I hadn't been already, in just the McCarthy-like fashion I described in an article below. To be perfectly clear, I engage in no illegal activity, involving dogs or otherwise, but as an American Citizen, and perhaps insofar as this site may make me a journalist, I assert that it is my right to discuss this, or any, subject and think that it's a shame that people are afraid to even advocate such a position for fear of reprisal by the well funded humane societies' manipulation of law enforcement agencies.
[1] Here's from the ESPN poll results:
A consortium of animal rights groups has recommended a prison sentence of 4 years, 9 months for Vick. What is your opinion of this sentence?
53.1%
Too harsh
24.6%
Just right
22.3%
Too light
* notice the ratio is almost two and half to one believing the sentence would be too harsh as opposed to too light, and this is ESPN, not some gamedog oriented site.
[2] One needs only look at the rss feed to the right on this page to see evidence of this:
https://www.peta.org/actioncenter/ActionAlerts-item.asp?id=2319 "Ask the Denver City Council to Ban Horse-Drawn Carriages"
I've been doing some fall cleaning lately, and you know I got to thinking the other day that in addition to the old historical dog magazines I had, I also had some copies of perfectly legitimate videos that could potentially have been misconstrued to come under the heading of animal fighting under some of these new, crazy laws. I had one called "Marty Stouffer's Wild America Spectacular Showdowns" which is all these wild match ups. What if someone videos two black widows in a field somewhere in Montana fighting and one killing the other, would THAT be considered animal fighting and be prosecutable? It sure gets to be a pretty slippery slope.
Additionally, there was a good program on PBS' Now this morning which got me thinking about this stuff again. It's pretty frightening. Apparently the government has for some time now been supplied by AT&T (and others, but the overwhelming majority seems to come from AT&T) with virtually all emails going through their system. AT&T handles email not only for their own users but several "free" email providers as well, including yahoo. It probably includes a huge majority of all emails sent or received in this country, and maybe others (all the "maybe's" and "probably's" are a result of this entire program being secret and under no oversight by anyone but good ol' GW and his minions of anti-privacy pirates). Altogether this amounts to billions, maybe trillions, of emails which, as part of their routing, have been run through some sort of program that decides if they warrant further examination and flags those for follow up.
It would not surprise me one bit if somehow the hsus/peta lobby could convince this president and congress that alleged "dogfighters"[1] are terrorists and somehow make this blatantly unConstututional practice acceptable as it relates to 'them'. the supposedly oppositional democrats have bought right into all this secret wiretapping bullsht, and email interception, and validated it with law as recently as a few months ago. argh.
if you'd like to comment on or reply to this post, please find the appropriate area HERE.
[1] let's not forget that just a few months ago, in June '07, JP Goodwin was quoted as saying there were "20,000" nationally known dogfighters in their 'massive database'[2] . Now, just a few months later, their estimate has doubled to "40,000"[3]! that's 800 individuals per state! I believe it's a ridiculous LIE designed to gather more donations. Not only is there no possible way that that many people are actually doing such a thing in any sort of supposedly organized fashion, but I believe they must have many, many people on there that are completely innocent!
Additionally, if anyone has thoughts on how to find out if they've shared this supposed document with any governmental agency, and if so which, I'd be happy to hear them. I find this whole matter to be quite McCarthy-like and patently un-American and I could likely assist in making any FOIA-type claims that might help expose this travesty.
[2 ]https://content.hamptonroads.com/story.cfm?story=126838&ran=241086 "...was raided and evidence of a suspected dogfighting operation was found there in April, Goodwin added the NFL star to a massive database he oversees. The 20,000 names it contains include a rogue’s gallery of the nation’s most notorious known and suspected dog fighters" - notice the repeated use of the word SUSPECTED. he had only been accused and convicted of nothing and yet was added to some quasi-governmental database anyway.
February 2023: @Gamedogs was confiscated by Twitter last month. Gamedogs.org has been online since before anyone ever even thought of Twitter, and on Twitter since 2009 - but they have decided that this account is somehow suddenly suspicious and locked me out. I have been approached numerous times over the years by various "gamers" that wanted my handle. Now it's just been taken, and obviously I will not be "verifying" any phone number for the incel clown king billionaire. I posted my suspension at: SuspensionReport.com.
Now folks, this is a GREAT thing, but please only bring out dogs to these type of events that are suited to such things, like this one is. if you bring out dogs that would be barking and taking shots at other dogs (let alone people!) it would go the opposite way in publicity, so please keep that in mind when being inspired by this story. There are many ways to help the APBT's cause, please find at least one that you and/or your dogs can do. If you need suggestions or want to help but don't know how - drop me an email, I can find something for you to do. 
