FSS Members,
Please take a few minutes to send in your objections to the PAWS Statute. A very
easy to use tool has been set up to send your comments (information below). If
passed, this will dramatically expand the scope of the Animal Welfare Act to far
beyond its original intent.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
PAWS ALERT...The Pet Animal Welfare Statute of 2005...PAWS ALERT
EVERY BIRD BREEDER WHO SELLS ANY BIRD TO A MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC AS A PET WILL BE
COVERED UNDER PAWS AND WILL BE SUBJECT TO USDA INSPECTION, HOUSING, CARE, RECORD
KEEPING, AND PUBLIC DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENTS !!
EVERY BIRD RESCUER WHO PLACES A BIRD IN A NEW HOME AND WHO ACCEPTS ANY
COMPENSATION WILL ALSO BE COVERED UNDER PAWS AND WILL BE SUBJECT TO USDA
INSPECTION, HOUSING, CARE, RECORD KEEPING, AND PUBLIC DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENTS!!
PAWS, SB1139 and HB2669, is written so that it appears that it is specifically
meant to focus only on dogs and cats. PAWS was introduced to Congress on May 26,
2005 by Senator Santorum and co-sponsored by Senator Durbin. However, the result
of this poorly crafted legislation is that all warm blooded animals which are
now covered by the Animal Welfare Act are also covered by PAWS: birds, hamsters,
gerbils, guinea pigs, rabbits, etc.
Under the current Animal Welfare Act (AWA), "dealers" are regulated. In the
current AWA a "dealer" is defined to include "any person who, in commerce, for
compensation or profit, delivers for transportation, or transports, except as a
carrier, buys, or sells, or negotiates the purchase or sale of, (1) any dog or
other animal whether alive or dead for research, teaching, exhibition, or use as
a pet," but does not include "retail pet stores." PAWS does not remove this
language from the AWA.
PAWS contains certain specific exclusions from regulation for certain dog and
cat breeders and sellers. However, these exclusions in PAWS apply only to dogs
and cats. While the PAWS exclusions will allow certain smaller dog and cat
breeders and sellers to remain unregulated under the AWA, these exclusions do
not exempt any breeders of any other warm blooded animals that are now included
in the definition of "animal" under the AWA and that are included under the AWA.
Pet stores cannot sell intact animals or "wild" animals or they also fall under
the PAWS requirement of USDA inspections and permits.
PAWS completely reverses the original intent of Congress with regard to the
Animal Welfare Act (AWA), and the regulation and inspection of animals "in
commerce." When the AWA was first passed in 1966, the original intent of
Congress was to regulate large commercial breeding facilities and ensure that
the animals in those facilities were treated humanely. The intent was never to
regulate small in-home hobby breeders. This Congressional intent has been clear
and consistent for over 38 years. Under the existing AWA (without PAWS), "retail
pet stores" are exempt from regulation under the AWA. For decades, the Secretary
of Agriculture has determined that home-based breeders are "retail pet stores,"
and as such, are exempt from regulation under the AWA.
The appropriateness and legality of this determination of the Secretary of
Agriculture was specifically recognized and upheld by the federal appellate
court in the recent case brought by the Doris Day Animal League. In that case,
the DDAL sued the USDA to force the USDA to inspect small breeders in private
residences who sell directly to the public on the theory that they were not
excluded from the AWA as "retail pet stores." The court pointed out that
home-based breeders are not completely unregulated, but are in fact subject to
direct scrutiny and oversight by their customers, and that there are "many State
and local laws and ordinances in place to monitor and respond to allegations of
inhumane treatment of and inadequate housing for animals owned by private retail
dealers." The court also ruled that "it was also within the authority delegated
to him by Congress for the Secretary to decline to amend the definition in light
of the potential invasions of privacy that would result if federal inspectors
began enforcing cleaning, sanitation, handling, and other regulatory
requirements in private homes."
DDAL lost the case and appealed the decision to the US Supreme Court. The US
Supreme Court refused to hear the appeal by DDAL, and the decision stands that
small breeders in private residences are excluded from regulation under the AWA.
The AWA does not now contain a definition of what is a "retail pet store,' and
over time the Secretary of Agriculture has determined that several types of
breeders and sellers are exempt from AWA regulation as retail pet stores,
including home-based breeders who sell pets to the public. PAWS seeks to insert
a new definition of "retail pet store" into the AWA, and PAWS states that a
"retail pet store" does not include (meaning they will be regulated under the
AWA):
"(A) a person breeding animals to sell to the public as pets;
(B) a person selling hunting, security, or breeding dogs; or
(C) a person selling wild animals."
PAWS is an effort by DDAL and its associates to nullify that court decision and
to nullify the long-standing intent of Congress that home-based breeders should
remain unregulated by the AWA.
Although the arguments put forth for PAWS state that the intent is to regulate
"puppy mills," it must be noted that all large commercial dog breeding
facilities wholesaling animals are already inspected by the USDA. It must also
be noted that the language in the PAWS bill speaks specifically to the
regulation of in-home breeders and states that exemptions would apply to those
who breed six litters or less or sell 25 or less dogs or cats. Since there is no
mention made of any other animals being excluded under PAWS, sale of any other
"animals" will be regulated under the AWA.
Given the poorly crafted wording of PAWS, it would pose problems for many
thousands of dog and cat breeders, small animal breeders and all bird breeders
who sell to the public. It is important that we contact our legislators.
RECOMMENDED ACTION
For those with internet access, there is available an internet tool, CAPWIZ,
already set up that makes it possible to send a personalized message with one
click to the President, your State Senators by name, and all the members of the
U.S. Senate Agriculture Committee, by name. The bill will be heard soon in the
Senate Agriculture Committee.
FIRST, SEND AN EASY EMAIL TO YOUR SENATORS
1) Go to: http://capwiz.com/naiatrust/
to see the boxed "Alert SB1139" and click
on "click here" to go to next page.
2) After you read the Alert message, enter your zip code in the box and click on
"GO". Next you see a page on which to write.
3) You can click on two or more "Talking Points", then type in your personal
message, and press "Send" to send the e-mail.
SECOND, SEND A COPY BY POSTAL MAIL TO YOUR SENATORS
4) Check your e-mailbox, which will contain a copy of your e-mail to your
Senators, copy it and paste it into your word processor. Print two copies to
each senator and sign them. In the unlikely event you do not receive the e-mail,
repeat 1, 2, and 3 above and select the "letter" option.
5) Understand that mail into Washington is delayed by two to four weeks. On the
other hand, letters are about 3000 times less plentiful and significantly more
effective than e-mail in this regard.
6) Address and mail the first copy.
THIRD, SEND A SECOND COPY BY FAX TO YOUR SENATORS
7) Find your Senator's FAX number at www.senate.gov
and FAX the second copy. FAX
transmissions are almost as effective as snail mail. Also send FAX copies to the
Chairman of the Senate Agriculture Committee the Honorable Senator Saxby
Chambliss. His FAX number is 202-224-0103.
8) Do not use your employer's e-mail without permission. Go to Kinko's etc. if
you don't have a FAX.
9) Phone calls help: Senate Agriculture Committee, Senator Saxby Chambliss,
Chairman: phone: 202-224-3521, Senator Rick Santorum: phone: 202-224-6324,
Senator Richard Durbin: 202-224-2152
FOURTH, ASK YOUR FRIENDS TO DO THE SAME
10) Find 20 committed and close friends and ask each of them to take these four
easy steps.
FINALLY, CHECK THE OPA WEBSITE WEEKLY FOR ALERT UPDATES:
www.proaviculture.com
If PAWS is moved out of the Senate Agriculture Committee, we must target other
committees.
For USPO mail to the Senate Agriculture Committee, address:
The Honorable Senator Saxby Chambliss
Chairman of the Senate Agriculture Committee
416 Russell Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
Senator Tom Harkin
731 Hart Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
For USPO mail to the sponsor and co-sponsor of PAWS, SB1139, address:
Senator Rick Santorum
511 Dirksen Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
Senator Richard Durbin
332 Dirksen Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
Please be sure to place in the heading of your letters/faxes/e-mails your
support or opposition to PAWS so that it is immediately clear that you are in
favor of or opposed to this proposed legislation. Personal comments are valued
because they illustrate how the legislation will affect you and your bird
keeping. Always be polite and thank the legislators for their consideration.