NAIA Official Blog

The Tijuana Sun reports that Tijuana’s numerous unregistered animal shelters – many of which are shipping dogs north to U.S. consumers – are creating a nightmare for local animal control, animal welfare activists, and especially dogs. Cases of overcrowding, cruelty, filth, and illness abound, but unfortunately, very few of the city’s shelters are registered or even identified by officials. This makes it incredibly difficult to monitor and improve shelters so they meet health and welfare standards.

Exacerbating this already daunting task is the fact that there is a lot of money to be made by shipping street dogs north to well-intentioned U.S. homes. Even people who start out only wanting to “save lives” can get sucked in. When there is a near-limitless supply of street dogs to export, and each dog is being shipped out at $20 a tail, you will reach a point where you are running a business, rather than a shelter, whether you admit it or not. It’s inevitable. What incentive is there to stop, register your shelter, and solve the problem at its source?

It is estimated that there are 50,000 street dogs currently living in Tijuana. That’s a lot of dogs, but fortunately, there are two good steps going forward. The first step would be for the local government to allocate resources toward rescue, rehab, and sterilization programs and partnerships. A concerted effort would really help put a dent in this welfare, health, and safety dilemma. Of course, this is not something we can magically enact, and no matter how well and urgently Animal Lawyers of Mexico or other welfare groups state their case, they do not have magical powers either.

The second step going forward is something we do have a say over, however: showing our support for the Healthy Dog Importation Act. Screening more of the dogs that come in for good health, appropriate age, and vaccination status disincentivizes the practice of willy-nilly shipping dogs into the United States, and, most urgently, protects the health of people, pets, and agriculture. Raising these standards for importation may also, less directly, lead to welfare and animal service improvements in places that had previously profited by shipping their “overflow” problems elsewhere.

(Translated) Shelters for homeless dogs in Tijuana, necessary, but irregular

Resources
★     NAIA: Healthy Dog Importation Act of 2023, June Update
★     Puppies being exploited at California port of entry, say animal rights’ advocates

On Wednesday, the USDA announced it was “implementing a multi-step effort” to help substantiate labeling claims on meat and poultry products regarding how the animals were raised.

The idea behind this is that labels used in marketing, such as “grass-fed” or “free-range,” which are currently voluntary, need to be verified by the Food Safety and Inspection Service so that consumers can have more trust in what they are buying – as well as in the USDA approval on the packaging. Cattle labeled as “raised without antibiotics” will be assessed to check for antibiotic residue, and whether verification is needed there, as well.

More clarity and trust is an important goal. Food labeling can be confusing. Sometimes it feels like you need a chemistry degree just to make sense of the ingredients listed on a bag of Doritos – and hardly anybody cares how a Dorito was raised. When it comes to health and animal welfare claims that are seen as making a product more desirable to consumers, avoiding confusion takes on more urgency. Allowing producers to slap on appealing, but befuddling and/or meaningless labels takes advantage of consumers’ good intentions, and undermines trust in the agencies we empower to enforce safety and fair play.

USDA to revise meat labeling guidelines for claims like ‘grass-fed’ or ‘free-range’

Resources
★     (Press Release) USDA Launches Effort to Strengthen Substantiation of Animal-Raising Claims
★     Food Ingredients of Public Health Concern (See Nitrate Language)

What a great way to head into the weekend! We are proud to announce that Dr. Marty Greer, DVM, JD, and longtime NAIA Board Chair, was named Veterinarian of the year by the Westminster Kennel Club and Trupanion this week. Marty has long been a leader in the area of theriogenology (for canine reproduction), and we’ve always been proud of the herculean amount of work, networking, and outreach she puts into animal care and welfare. It is just fantastic seeing her recognized again for her contributions. Congratulations, Marty! Click below to read the full press release from the Westminster Kennel Club and Trupanion.

Full Press Release

Last week, animal owners everywhere were rattled when Florida Fish and Wildlife Commission (FWC) officers killed 34 privately owned pythons and a gravid boa. To better understand how this came about, it is important to have a bit of backstory. In 2021, FWC came up with and implemented a list of animals that would be banned and illegal to privately own, keep, sell, trade, or breed. These animals were originally covered by a conditional permit. The list includes tegus, green iguanas, several pythons, and other reptiles. This, too, has a backstory – those animals can live in parts of Florida’s climate and thrive, which can lead to ecosystem imbalances. There are populations of large constrictors, iguanas, and tegus living in the Everglades and elsewhere that have impacted native wildlife.

The 2021 ruling is currently being challenged as unconstitutional in a lawsuit against FWC and has yet to be formally decided and ruled upon. Owners and breeders were given 90 days to rehome their animals. That ruling turned law-abiding animal owners into criminals overnight.

Fast forward to last Thursday, when FWC officers went to Bill McAdam’s property looking for an escaped python. Chris Coffee, the owner of the pythons whose snakes were under constructive seizure, let them in to let them inspect the animal enclosures, all of which were locked. What happened after that was captured on video and linked to in the original press release from USARK FL. The officers, over a span of a few hours, killed 35 snakes, one of which was legally kept and killed by accident. The pythons were all registered, microchipped, and on documented inventory with FWC as Mr. Coffee was in full compliance with the Conditional Species Permit rules before that program was terminated by FWC for these species in 2021. That snake was a pet, raised by Mr. McAdam and was gravid with 32 offspring due in one month. 29 of the snakes killed were reticulated pythons, which are not listed as an invasive species in Florida. The remaining five were burmese pythons, which are listed as invasive species in Florida. Also troubling is the method in which the officers used to dispatch the snakes: they did not follow the FWC approved two-step process for humanely euthanizing reptiles as stipulated on their website. The officers only performed Step 1 and never completed the humane process by carrying out Step 2.

This is a truly sad situation where the welfare of animals was not taken into consideration. The snakes were born and raised in human care and kept by knowledgeable owners. We understand the dangers posed by invasive species, but also the importance of making sure animal owners operate within a framework of just and reasonable laws. We hope to see, at the very least, an investigation and compensation for the animals lost.

Resources
★     USARK: FWC Officers Slaughter Pet Boa and 34 other Snakes on Holy Thursday
★     FWC: Humane Killing Methods for Nonnative Reptiles

A supremely nasty anti-dog breeder bill, SB 1492, was recently introduced in Florida. There is nothing particularly new in this bill. It assumes that breeders are cruel, unethical, money-grubbers. It also labels dogs “breeding female” on the assumption that the only reason someone wouldn’t choose to spay their dog is because they intend to breed them. Further, it has no problem saying we need to spay dogs at six months old, despite the well-known health and behavioral consequences associated with spaying and neutering dogs while they are still puppies.

Then there are the registration fees and warrantless home inspections that, as the Canine Chronicle points out, even convicted felons, rapists, and murderers are not required to submit to. Oh, and let’s not forget the somewhat opaque conditions under which a dog can be seized, that “breeding facilities” have to post their addresses online (opening them up to criminal activity and harassment), and, of course, that anyone who has a litter is now a “breeding facility.”

That’s not everything, but you get the idea. It’s like the goal here was to make a greatest-hits compilation of every bad breeder bill ever proposed or passed. Feels like the early 2010s all over again – what a heinous mess! Ugh.

Anyhow, as you have likely surmised, we strongly oppose Florida SB 1492, and NAIA Trust will be fighting against it.

Resources
★     Florida SB 1492
★     The growing debate over spaying and neutering dogs

A recent photo story in the Wall Street Journal shared some gorgeous dog pictures and some very predictable news on Greyhounds the other day. In the United States, Greyhound racing has faded in popularity over the last half century, a decline capitalized on and greatly accelerated by the actions of animal rights activists, legislators, and other interest groups.

Correlating with the drop in popularity and availability of the sport was a rise in “racetrack rescue” Greyhound adoptions, but we’ve reached a point where – surprise! – there are now more people who want to adopt Greyhounds than there are available Greyhounds. Further, there are also fewer reputable breeders maintaining these dogs… and to get one of their puppies, you’ll need to hop on a waitlist and fork over a lot of money! Meanwhile, there are concerns that “cash crop” breeders will fill in the void, capitalizing on the popularity of this beloved breed (they aren’t numerous like Labradors or Frenchies, but the people who love Greyhounds really adore them – and will find a way to get one), while rescues have modified their business model by switching to importing retired racing dogs from countries where the Greyhound racing is popular. If this all seems so very familiar, it’s because, well… it is.

Resources
★     Once One of America’s Favorite Pastimes, Greyhound Racing Eats Dust
★     ‘Ethical conundrum’: sending retired Australian greyhounds to US rescues some – but at what cost?

Hunting has a long history and remains popular in Spain, generating a respectable 5 billion Euros annually. But just as in many other Western countries, hunting is considered a more rural activity, while urban folks are less likely to hunt and more likely to look down on or even disapprove of it.

A recently proposed animal rights law in Spain places this urban-rural divide on stark display. In a nutshell, a law was proposed by the ruling Spanish Socialist Workers’ Party (PSOE), that reads as if someone tried to thoughtlessly cobble together every low-hanging concession to animal rights activists they could come up with before lunch break. Unfortunately for the PSOE, this law contained provisions about abandoned animals, training, and breeding that really ticked off a group of key supporters: rural voters. More specifically, hunters. Hunters considered the law an attack with the potential to “legislate hunting out of existence.” This led to a last-minute amendment excluding hunting dogs and other rural activities… and raised questions about the viability of the proposed law as a whole.

It is a positive that the disagreement between the party’s urban and rural bases led to a favorable amendment (and, ideally, towards the law being shelved altogether). However, this example also serves as a troubling reminder of how non-stakeholders often feel perfectly fine about passing their values onto others. “I live a different lifestyle than you, and, for various reasons, have never or will never hunt. But never mind that: let me tell you how you need to do it.” If you are involved in animal sports or hobbies of any variety, you know you’ve heard a variation on that theme before!

Resources
★     Study Shows the Benefits of Hunting in Rural Areas
★     Farm Bureau: Fast Facts About Agriculture & Food

The legislative season is underway in many states and cities, which, of course, means hundreds (thousands!) of pages of proposed laws and ordinances governing animals and animal enterprises.

In Las Vegas, Nevada, the number of dogs or cats a person can own without a permit increased from four to six, while new regulations on groomers and boarding facilities were rejected. In Monroe, Georgia, a 2014 ordinance was updated, banning the tethering of unattended pets. Meanwhile, a leash law was narrowly rejected in Clarinda County, Iowa, and Pierce County, Georgia, discovered their new ordinance on animal burials was unnecessary: there has been one on the books since 1991. And these examples are just from the last few days.

Laws regarding animals and animal issues are nothing new. The Code of Hammurabi dealt with – rather forcefully – the theft of livestock and working animals nearly 3,800 years ago! Animals play such a vital role in our day-to-day lives, it is essential that a legal framework exists to define our relationship with them. At the same time, it is important to be aware that many laws pertaining to animals, even if they sound great on the surface, can be arbitrary, redundant, or too one-size-fits-all to be fair or practical. They may be left unfunded and unenforced (or simply be unenforceable), pushed by business interests with ulterior motives, or by activists whose end goal is destroying (or possibly supplanting) a popular hobby or industry. They are also quite often crafted by lawmakers who possess little to no hands-on experience with the issues they are attempting to rectify – so even if their efforts are entirely heartfelt and come with the best of intentions, they are often operating without the full picture.

Keep this in mind. And when you hear about a new animal ordinance and wonder if you should support it or not, ask yourself a few questions. Does it seek to remedy a legitimate public health and safety or animal welfare issue? If so, will the ordinance actually be enforced? What, if any, unintended consequences or “camel’s noses under the tent” can you see? Laws are necessary, but they must also be reasonable, solve real issues, and be enforced. If they are not, they probably create at least as many problems as they solve.

Resources
★     LV Council approves increase in pet ownership, rejects more regulation of animal pros
★     ​Monroe unanimously adopts the amended Animal Ordinance in accordance with Walton County’s Ordinance
★     Proposed Clarinda leash law fails second reading after calls for stricter regulations
★     County discovers it already has large animal burial ordinance

The US Fish and Wildlife Service is being sued by the Organization of Professional Aviculturists Inc. and the Lineolated Parakeet Society. They allege that USFWS is not allowing for the importation of captive-bred parrots under the rules of the Wild Exotic Bird Conservation Act (WBCA).

Signed into law in 1992, the WBCA is meant to protect bird species bred in human care from having their wild populations affected by the wildlife trade. It also established the Exotic Bird Conservation fund for in situ conservation efforts. There is an approved list of birds from CITES that can be imported.

The plaintiffs state in the lawsuit that FWS denied their application to import birds already on the approved list, and that it is the duty of FWS, as per the act, to publish notice of list changes and invite public comment. It has been 30 years since that last happened. It will be interesting to see what happens with this lawsuit, as FWS has been remiss in their duties to not only revise the lists over time, but to implement key parts of the act.

Resources
★     Wild Bird Conservation Act
★     Red List update: parrots of the Americas in peril

As if on cue, a few minutes after we put out yesterday’s blog on imported Korean rescue dogs introducing a new strain of canine distemper into North America, our inbox was awash with this APB:

Officers looking for rescue dog in Leawood that escaped, possibly exposed to rabies

The escaped dog was in a group of 26 dogs imported from Egypt, in which one got sick and tested positive for rabies. The dog that escaped has not shown any signs of the disease itself.

Yes, by all means let’s displace our domestic dog population with pets from a part of the world where the CDC recommends rabies vaccines for anybody who might interact with the local animal population. What could possibly go wrong?

One final note: the rescue group says they followed proper protocol in importing the dogs, which if true, is a very strong argument in favor of modernizing our current importation laws, which have not been significantly updated since the 1950s. Situations like this, which threaten our animals and ourselves, shed still more light on why NAIA and the NAIA Trust are working on a federal bill to rein in irresponsible international rescue.

Last seen wearing purple sweater. May have been exposed to rabies.