http://www.facebook.com/l.php?u=http://kmox.cbslocal.com/shows/mark-reardon/&h=b6261

Can you imagine the humiliation that I felt. The laughter of my home community. Having to go to our hometown grocery store amongst my friends. Shame, shame Barbara ! Everyone knows your name!

“Where is Mary and all those dogs?” “Why weren’t we invited to that wedding?” “You keepin her and those dogs down in your basement?”

Regardless…
It won’t be enough to do anything. It’s just a momentary blip. Amusing, yes, but it will be forgotten.

Thank you SO much for making my day start out with an enormous laugh.  I love how she just kept ignoring the facts as if they’re completely irrelevant to the conversation.

Maybe they’re in the attic, Jim. 

It was so obviously making things up as she went! 

And the ones who we CAN’T budge on Prop B will have a million excuses for her, I’m sure.  There’s no better voter than the clueless.  :-|

I can’t believe they didn’t provide Mark with the entire copy of the bill?  I’ve read it, and line 9 is especially worrisome.  Further, there is nothing BUT loopholes in their wording.  It is badly written legislation that is being suggested and proposed using emotional tactics and no logic!

What about the fact that they brought in a Texas breeder and trying to pass her off as a Missouri breeder???  I’m told the other two in the ad pitch-persons actually run rescues, who will not be affected by this law. And is it true that Tony LaRussa was paid $2mil for his ad??

How can we possibly believe any part of her conversation after those comments?? And the new rules are just as “vague” as she is claiming! Feeding a dog at least once a day? Giving them free access to outdoors at all times? (ie a whelping can occur is 20 degree weather? Puh-leeze)

And seeing as she has her name tied to HSUS, how can we believe anything that ANY of these state directors are saying? Clearly they are willing to say ANYTHING in order to force their ideas on anyone!

P.s. I love the radio guy’s reaction. It’s like, wait, you just lied and shrugged it off? what they hey??

Oh, now, let’s not let the facts get in the way!  HSUS thinks that they can just blithely tell their deceitful, misleading lies and everyone will just take it for the truth.  Missourians, stand up to this organization!

What do you think will happen if all the revenues related to professional dog breeders -dog care - dog food industry will be lost in the state of Missouri? If there is not enough funds to pay for inspectors now, what will happen if more money removed? 
Barbara , why are you evading the question why HSUS and other shelters do not have to comply to the same rules you are trying to force on professional breeders. And the small cages is bogus, all licensed breeders must comply to the size of the area as stated by USDA and the State.

Jim, you did a great job in that interview! LOL, ROTFL about your non-existent wife!

I love this site!  Finally someone exposes the lies!  Their goal is no secret:

“We have no ethical obligation to preserve the different breeds of livestock produced through selective breeding. One generation and out. We have no problem with the extinction of domestic animals. They are creations of human selective breeding.” Wayne Pacelle, Senior VP of Humane Society of the US, formerly of Friends of Animals and Fund for Animals, Animal People, May, 1993

“Our goal is to make [the public think of] breeding [dogs and cats] like drunk driving and smoking.” Kim Sturla, former director of the Peninsula Humane Society and Western Director of Fund for Animals, stated during Kill the Crisis, not the Animals campaign and workshops, 1991

“My goal is the abolition of all animal agriculture.” JP Goodwin, employed at the Humane Society of the US, formerly at Coalition to Abolish the Fur Trade, as quoted on AR-Views, an animal rights Internet discussion group in 1996.

Their goals are no secret.  Don’t get sucked in by the big lies

Here is a link to the MO Sec of State’s page showing the proposed statute. The “domestic pet” dispute is in Section A.5.(9)

It’s about 2/3 of the way down—look for (9).

The ambiguity of that subsection is what’s worrisome.

This goes to show, once again, the HSUS is not a reliable source.  In high school and college, I was taught that the most important part of research is finding a “credible” source.  Being downgraded on reports was the penalty.

I would hope that any high-schooler would be downgraded for citing them.  It continues to amaze me that mainstream media, you know the professional reporters,  will go to this sham group for “Facts” when this is further proof that HSUS is hardly “credible”.

But HSUS is “regardless…” to any facts.

“The H$U$ - wonderfully unfettered by the truth!”

  How is that for a nice new slogan for them?

Barbara me thinks you doth make too many mistakes to be considered at all…..if the supporters of Prop B don’t even know what the hell they are doing - how in the world can anyone else take them seriously?

Dr. Foster I applaud you in your efforts….good job making the H$U$ and their crap Prop look utterly ridiculous…and bringing up line 9 was just the icing on the cake!  H$U$‘s way of eventually using this Prop to eradicate farming as well!  Kudos for your support of VOTING NO on Prop B…and we’re hearing it from the trenches of one who works with these breeders!

Oh my!  I just loved the way Mark held Barbara’s feet to the fire and wouldn’t let her just shrug off her lie.  Wish the other interviewer would have made her answer about the model kennel HSUS must have built to show us how we are supposed to house dogs.  That question just gets totally ignored.  But we keep asking…......

I worry about the definition of “cover” or “covered” in that.  To me the term covered or cover means bred or breeding livestock.

I would love to know if they gave money to LaRussa.  If they paid him and he donated as well, did the funds go right back to HSUS? or one of their other groups?  I think that has happened where I live with a group or groups.

domestic pet” dispute is in Section A.5.(9)

My guess is ferrets, reptiles, parakeets, rabbits and the like.

However, horses, sheep, swine, goats, and cattle are considered “domesticated animals.” 
The vagueness there cracks open that door that HSUS can then shove through at a more opportune moment.

Here in CO, the CO Humane Society has partnered with our own ag dept as Bureau of Animal Protection agents.

While CO law still identifies horses as livestock, CHS has developed a Memorandum of Understanding with rural counties.

The MoU states:  “1. Animals. This MOU relates to CHS’ work concerning domestic companion animals, including
equines not used in the production of food or fiber. It does not relate to any other kinds of animals, including livestock.”

But wait! a horse is still considered livestock in CO.  Hmmm, sounds like a back door tactic.

The MoU also states it may investigate reports from the public or the SO on cases of neglect or cruelty on above said animal—says nothing about contacting the SO first.

They are very sly and skillful at double-talk. 

This is what vague wording will get you.

When reading and hearing Barbara Schmitz it is almost impossible not to burst into laughter. But when you consider the political power and public exposure such as the TV ads for Prop B that Ms. Schmitz and the HSUS have and it becomes very frightening. There is something that I just don’t understand and I am not the only one. Why aren’t the laws already on the books enforced? There is a dog breeder in my neighborhood. Neighbors for well over a year have not been able to sleep due to the 24/7 dog barking. A back yard in a residential area of approximately 20x30 ft. is full of dog runs. Each run is on dirt. There is no shelter over the runs, no protection for the dogs from the weather. I know I wouldn’t like to live in mud and urine and feces. There are approximately five dogs to each run with one dog house; some dog houses intact, some not intact. I have no idea if food and clean water are available. I am limited by what I can see from staying on public property. I had the terrible experience of smelling the odor of a decomposing human body a few years ago. That is the odor eminating from that back yard and the dogs (not from nearby sewage lagoons as some legal authorities and the dog owners claim. The odor from a malfunctioning sewage lagoon smells like sewage and the lagoons have had a bad odor less than half a dozen times over the last 23 years. The county clerk’s office doesn’t know if the dogs being bred on this property constitute a dog breeding facility or a farm. What?! There is no record that I can find of licenses, taxes paid, vet care, vaccinations or anything else one would associate with a reputable breeder. There are also other questions. Since there is no room for anything but runs where are the dogs exercized? How often are the bitches bred? More questions that any reputable dog breeder would be glad to answer and provide the proof. I have been told the Sheriff’s office has been notified by many neighbors. If nothing else how about nuisance laws? Why does a neighborhood have to go through the expensive and time consuming process of taking something like this to the courts to be able to live comfortably in their own homes? What about neighbors who are ill or elderly but must partake in this process for the sake of their quality of life within their own homes? There is a covenant for this subdivision that says that no businesses shall be operated within this subdivision but we cannot find anyone willing to enforce this. If it is a matter of funding for the legal authorities to enforce current laws instead of the HSUS spending thousands and thousands of dollars on Prop B (Missouri voters, please research Prop B and its implications carefully) spend that money to assist in enforcing the laws already on the books. Perhaps this dog breeder is meeting all legal requirements. Perhaps healthy dogs are safely and humanely being bred and healthy puppies are being sold. What do you think?

I actually was more impressed with her ability to stay on-topic regarding requirements for shelters…and her almost mantra-like way of repeating that this legislation applied ONLY to large, commercial breeders and the restrictions would apply ONLY to them…without ever admitting that shelters were, in fact, exempt…just kept repeating the legislation had a specific target…commercial breeders.  With the ability to lie off the cuff as easily as she did, and dismiss being challenger without batting an eye…and her ability to repeat, repeat, repeat the “party” line…she should make a fabulous politician.  Perhaps not in Missouri…but she has promise.

Shelters are not “exempt” because there’s no need for an exemption. the bill isn’t aimed at places that have lots of dogs. it’s aimed at places that have lots of dogs and breed them for money. You people keep trying to compare apples and oranges.

Lou Ann,
MO is probably like my own state of CO…funds don’t exist to allow inspectors to keep on top.  Our inspectors cover a huge area of land.  We have four inspectors for a total of about 1700 facilities.  They count on public help for something like this.  “B” will not solve your issues.  If MO can’t handle enforcement at this point, it will open the door for HSUS to “offer their help” and then they will start kicking in doors.  Better that MO find a way to perhaps afford more inspectors.  Here in CO our shelters pay a license fee. 

One of the problems in CO has been unequal enforcement—a lawsuit is in the works now over that.

Call your ag dept and ask for the pet animal division.  Then find out who the inspector is for your area and call them.

Now, I’m not defending this person as I have no idea of their situation.
But…
Dogs on dirt is not itself a problem.  I personally have my dogs on sand—I pay for dumptruck loads every year.  It’s less muddy when it rains and easier to keep clean.  But I also have to dig out the floor area of the runs when the smells becomes noticeable and replace with fresh soil/sand/whatever.

Depending on the size of her runs, five dogs may not be a problem.
I try my best to always have at least two dogs together as they are social animals and I feel keeping them separate would be neglectful of their social mentality.  One dog house may or may not be a problem.  In cooler weather dogs like to kind of pile on top of each other and this allows them to share body warmth to help them all stay warmer.  If the houses are too small for all the dogs to get in there or if there are dominance issues that keeps a dog or dogs out, then there are problems.

Water is something I always have available to the dogs and in most cases food, too.  But I am trying to switch over to just feeding most of them once a day as they waste so much food now.  As a small, rural shelter, I can’t afford even that much waste.

In the end, if you feel there is neglect or even cruelty, contact your state inspector. 
If that doesn’t get you anywhere, then document a call to your sheriff (have everyone document all conversations regarding this issue).  If that doesn’t get you anywhere, get whatever pictures you can legally take and go to a town council or county commissioner meeting and approach the situation in a public forum.  If she’s breaking rules, then they may need to be “forced” to act.  At least you are building your evidence and can then start letter-writing campaigns—gov’t doesn’t like unfriendly media attention.
It’s harder for Gov’t to ignore something once it’s on the record.  Approaching your gov’t should be your last resort.

An adversarial position will not be good for your neighborhood if she remains, but if she’s breaking the law, then it must be enforced.  Bad laws should not be broken, but fixed or replaced.  Perhaps a mediator could approach her with your complaints and see if she’s open to working on the problems. 

Their right to have their business (within the confines of the law) and do what they want on their property ends at the property line, and your right to quiet and clean air begins at your’s.

Ever wonder what happened to those folks that flunked out of your high school debate class?  They joined the Animal Rights movement.

This just proves that statement.

“The law is vague, the law has loopholes, blah blah blah blah blah”. 

Good job, Dr. Foster.

@Bob….many animals do suffer in shelters and rescues.  Just because something is called a “shelter”, does not make it one.  I have pulled from many a shelter that should have been closed, and it’s employees indicted. And since this legislation attempts to define “responsibility” by number of animals…then I see no reason that a private individual should be held to a higher standard than others that care for animals.

You may see it as “apples and oranges” since “breeding” is a part of the equation.  And yes, there is most certainly an undercurrent of resentment in shelters making financial transactions, especially in the case of seizures where animals are supposedly pulled from deplorable conditions, and where the animals are emaciated and sick, and yet are up for adoption for $350 three days after the seizure.

“Legislation By Numbers”...“should” apply to everyone.  And that isn’t necessarily to “limit” the numbers in shelters…but shelters and rescues should then be held to the same “care” standards that private citizens are.  If an empty water dish in a private kennel can result in a citation, then an empty water dish in a shelter, should carry the same. If a lack of air-conditioning in the summer in a private kennel can be held as neglect, then the same lack of air conditioning in a shelter should also be held as neglect.  Should animals in shelters receive LESS care under the law, simply because they are “sheltered”? 

Care, is care, is care.  And animals should expect the same level of care regardless of facility, whether that is a private breeder, a rescue, or a private or municipal shelter.  Period.

@ Rosebud

Yes and don’t forget dead cats in the walls and wild raccoons in the ceilings but the Animal Shelter Commission in Dallas seems to get off without felony indictment!

One has to wonder about that HSUS study recently done since it seems the 2001 study by them caused that “green” shelter to be built! 

Did I read somewhere that the washing machine wasn’t big enough? or is it the water they refilter that doesn’t work well on the bedding?

Why should shelters be exempt? Several years ago, I did an evaluation of temperament of a dog in a shelter in Kansas.  Great new state of the art facility, however, on Friday evening the shelter was locked up after dogs were given water and a giant portion of food and left with NO person checking in on them until Monday afternoon.  Guess what that was like after 2 days.

Something I have not seen mentioned either is there is a way to curb abusive practice in this state through the Missouri Bark Alert Program.  It works.  We don’t need Prop B.

To the person posting about the Dallas Shelter, yes it’s a poster child of what a shelter should not be, nor what the staff should be.  Talk about a torture chamber for animals, and the shelter basically went all summer (IN Dallas) without a/c.  As for the washing machine…yes, they did not account for the volume of wash that would be necessary…and therefore do not have enough washing capacity to keep up with all the towels and bedding.  They are talking about purchasing a large commercial unit, which is a great idea if the city can fit it into the budget, but the problem that Plano ran into when they purchased their washing and drying units, was since they are VERY large commercial units, they did not fit through standard doorways (oops)...thankfully, Plano was in the process of a new construction phase and was able to deal with widening the doors during that construction phase to accommodate the units.  Since Dallas is an existing facility, I’m not sure whether they will be able to get commercial units into the shelter.  I’m sure they haven’t even considered that problem.  But yes, dead cats left to die in walls, renegade raccoons still wandering in the ceilings, (seemingly far too wiley for the humans at the shelter)  a cat removed from a nightbox with a catchpole (in direct conflict with procedures) breaking its jaw, ripping out its nails, tearing the flesh off one leg, and breaking the blood vessels in both eyes, coupled with forcing a dog with two broken legs to walk on a catchpole, and when the dog cried and refused, grabbing it by the rear to make it stand and walk.  In conjunction with no a/c for most of the summer, and a horrific kill rate, reaching almost into the 90 percentile. An air recirculation system that doesn’t work resulting in high infection rates.  Mold growing out of the air vents. Drainage problems. Wastewater issues. We can hope with the new interim management that things will improve…but I wonder, again…why should breeders be held to one standard, and a shelter be exempt? Any “breeder” that had these issues, would be labeled immediately as cruel, neglectful and abusive.  So why not a shelter?

I can also share a story of dog I rescued that was evidence in a cruelty case.  She was held at a small, municipal shelter, for almost a year.  Since she was evidence, and was going to be euthanized once the case was settled, she received pitiful care.  She had originally been vetted when she was seized, and cared for for a couple of months at the vet…she gained weight, she was treated for eye infections, ear infections, and groomed.  However, when the holidays approached, the vet did not have room to board her, so she was returned to the shelter, with meds (at no cost) and the offer of free refills, if and when needed.

When I pulled her from hell (yes…hell…) she was days from death, she was skin over bones…a walking skeleton..and according to the attending vet, between 48 and 72 hours from death.  She had been left in an interior kennel run (no outside access…) no fresh air, no light to speak of, and had been left in her own waste for days. There were several piles of feces in her run, when I went to pull her.  You know that deplorable overwhelming stench that everyone likes to talk about…yes, it was ALL that, IN THE SHELTER!  She was covered in ticks, she weighed less than when she had originally been seized from her OWNER, was so filthy and dirty, I thought she was black. When I bathed her, the water ran black for twenty minutes…she was actually a lighter brown dog.  Her nails were so overgrown, she walked on the sides of her feet. They literally curled around the bottom and sides of her paws.  They had NOT EVER been trimmed at the shelter.  And she had had NOTHING in the way of bedding, probably during her entire stay…as she had pressure sores all over her body. And since she was only skin over bones,,,sores were easily accomplished. She laid on concrete for months.  Her eyes were completely infected and green, and she was functionally blind at that point. And remained functionally so. The vet felt she probably could see shadow and light after treatment, but she never regained her true eyesight.  Her ears were completely infected again as well.  This was after being in the “care” of the shelter for over nine months.  Her prescriptions sat empty on her crate/run…they had never been refilled.  She was a “euth” case upon resolution, so why bother?  However, the DA prosecuting the case (the first after Texas made it a felony…) made it his quest to be sure this girl found her way out, if it was at all possible.  And it was.  She spent about a week at the vet on fluids for the first three or four days, and then slowly recovered and put on weight and rebounded.  Her foster mom adopted her, and although the first years of her life were hell, her last were lived in extreme comfort, and as a spoiled princess.  But her condition at the time seizure was far better than her condition coming out of the shelter after the trial.  So, before we start condemning breeders and dictating minimum standards of care, I think we should seriously consider making those standards apply to EVERYONE charged with caring for animals. There is no justification for any group or any entity being “exempt”.

I’m involved heavily with both sides of this issue, and responsible care is responsible care.  At the end of the day, if enforcement is the issue now….enforcement will be the issue tomorrow.  Nothing changes with more legislation.  And enforcement should apply to everyone.  After all, it IS about the animals, right?  Certainly no one would argue that this shelter was justified in the care given this dog?

To Cindy-
I think we agree in principle. A dog on dirt is fine but clean up the feces, etc. It is not a good idea to isolate a dog which is a social animal so give him a buddy in his run. Don’t put so any dogs in a run that they have to struggle for space. Unbelievably, we have tried all of your excellant suggestions and gone through the proper channels in the state of Missouri to end a puppy mill. For example, several of us filled out and sent in the required paperwork to the Divsion of Agriculture. I didn’t expect quick action because at the time the department was horribly under staffed with only seven inspecters for the entire state. A few months later an inspecter from the Division of Agriulture did an inspection, filled out his or her report and declared his or her job done. Is this a puppy mill? Does someone have no desire to do a lot of follow up work? In another case of domestic animal abuse and neglect in which I personally made no complaint but others did law enforcement threatened to charge anyone else making complaints with harassment. I can bet money on which horse will die first this winter. In yet another case involving abuse and neglect someone abandoned some horses. A concerned person tried to care for the animals a best as possible. One animal had on a halter that was too small so the flesh grew around the halter. You can imagine the wounds left when he halter was removed. The owner was no where to be found. One horse was old and became sick and died in spite of the best efforts of others to try to save it. The owner could not be found so someone spent the time and money to follow legal requirements to dispose of the body of the horse. To get the horses in the hands of someone who could properly take care of the remaining horses they were transported to their new home. Again the owner was no where to be found and there was no help from the legal authorities. Eventually, months later, word did reach the person who had originally abandoned the horses. He went to the local public prosecuter. The so called owner who wasn’t even required to have proof that he had ever even owned a horse had the court’s ear. One person that had been trying to care for the horses was forced to pay a few thousand dollars to the owner that had abandoned the horses in the first place. These atrocities add fuel to the HSUS fire.  Prop B isn’t just aimed at puppy mills. But the HSUS isn’t the answer. Look at the aftermath in the places where the HSUS has gained a foot hold not just on pet breeding but pet ownership, agriculture, etc. Just enforce the laws on the books!

So as long as a dog is in a non profit “no-kill” it is okay to be cruel to it? Wow! Can we say convoluted logic? So we take people’s dogs away from them and stick them in a tiny run where they get walked maybe once a week?