The gospel according to H$U$

From The Endangered Owner

Unless you've been living under a rock this year, it's impossible to avoid the onslaught of "ANTI-dog breeder" bills that have been introduced in no less than two dozen states pushed by none other than the Humane Society of the United States.

These two dozen bills are worded almost identical in all states, with the common theme being to limit the number of intact animals a person can own and in most cases, allowing for WARRANTLESS searches of the breeder's premises.

Are these laws really about cracking down on substandard breeders? Or is it a nationwide push to make dog breeding so troublesome and expensive that hobby breeders will just quit?

According to Wayne Pacelle's blog,

• "There are perhaps more than 10,000 mills in the nation, with Missouri accounting for more than 3,000, and then Oklahoma and Iowa the next biggest."
• Last year Virginia was the "hub" of puppy mills (the "Virginia Is For Puppy Mills" campaign), and Pennsylvania is "the puppy mill capitol of the East"

Gee, with Wayne stating facts like that, it makes you wonder WHY legislation is needed in states like Nevada, Minnesota, Washington, Oregon, Tennessee, Illinois, Maine, West Virginia, Arkansas, Delaware, Texas, California, Florida....you get the idea. Are all of these states infested with "puppy mills" as well?? The real reason for these bills? To ensnare the "other guy"...the hobby breeder; those breeders who are not required to operate under USDA guidelines.

From the H$U$ website: "Under current law in most states, and under current regulations of the federal Animal Welfare Act, individuals running breeding operations that only sell puppies directly to the public are not required to be licensed and inspected by an oversight agency." (YEP, show folks, that's YOU!)

And further: "USDA exempts breeding facilities – regardless of the number of animals they have or financial thresholds they meet – where the puppies are bred and sold directly to private pet owners as "retail pet stores."........"Without oversight, the operations can easily fall below even the most basic standards of humane housing and husbandry."

A good breeding facility law: (According to H$U$)
applies to all breeding operations with animals or animal sales numbering over a specified threshold. (can you say "limit laws")

• requires a licensing fee and pre-inspection. (Like $500 per intact animal fee...and "must be of good moral character", as we have seen in bills proposed this year)
• includes routine, unannounced inspections at least twice yearly. (Warrantless searches of private property, unconstitutional last time I checked)
• is enforced by an agency with adequate funding and properly trained and tested staff. (Oh yeah, we're just in the worst economic crisis since the Depression, but I'm sure Wayne and company would love to step in and take over this job, huh)
• rotates inspectors to cover different areas of the state. (Uh-huh, I can see that happening...who would want to uproot their families to move to a different area...)
• is equipped with strong penalties when facilities are in repeated non-compliance, including but not limited to cease and desist orders. (H$U$ translation: raids, intimidation of breeders into "signing over" all dogs so said dogs can be sold for profit to further stuff their warchests)

Do you get it yet?

Have you connected the dots?

The current nationwide push to "end puppy mills" is NOT about protecting animals...it is NOT about cracking down on substandard breeders...it is NOT about regulating commercial breeders that are already under USDA guidelines...

What it IS about is ending purebred dog breeding. Period. Using incrementalism (limiting the number of animals someone can own, which can easily be lowered next time, in a new law), the Animal Rights group, the Humane Society of the United States, is pushing it's REAL agenda: to eliminate the hobby breeder, who has now become "just another puppy mill" in the eyes of the public...There is no one left to throw under the bus. The bus is headed straight for OUR breeding programs.

Are you willing to throw away years of dedication to your breed and your breeding program? Are you still one of those breeders that thinks "this law won't apply to me"? Now it does. There can be no compromise, no backing down.

The only way to defeat the bullies is to get in their faces and scream, "HELL NO!! You will NOT take away MY rights...you will NOT tell me how many dogs I can own...you WILL NOT tell me how or when or to which dogs I can breed to!!!"

The "Anti-dog breeder bus" is roaring down the street...in YOUR state, or will be headed there shortly. There will be no "other guy" to sacrifice like we have done in the past because we are now the "other guy".

Animal Rights Agenda Explained

Join the Crusade Against HSUS+Pass It Forward—->

From Pet Defense

Below is the link to understanding how laws are passed by animal extremists to make animal use, breeding and ownership (yes, ownership) more difficult, and more EXPENSIVE………….

The money to support the animal rights agenda comes from millions of Americans who love animals and who, without understanding how their money will actually be used, mail checks to HSUS, PeTA, and other lesser known AR organizations.

This is America: It is our right to believe whatever we want and to try to convince others of what we believe.

However the AR movement goes beyond that. The biggest thing they do is pass laws that make animal use, breeding, and ownership steadily harder and more costly. This happens in several steps.

How Animal Rightists Pass Laws
http://www.pet-law.com/future/whatis.html
—————————————————————————————-

The above link is from pet-law, not Petdefense, but it is accurate and true.

Huge conglomerates that spend millions and millions in campaigns to pass ONE law use that money bascially from different sources, but MUCH of it pours in from $25 donations from pet owners who don’t know better.

Many young people (let’s say 18-20yr old) actually believe that the HSUS is helping save animals, or that HSUS is actually saving homeless cats and dogs.

Unfortunately, because HSUS shows commercials and websites and videos of cute dogs/cats, many people believe HSUS is saving such animals.

DON’T FALL INTO THIS TRAP FOR THE UNWARY!

Black Wednesday For U.S. Dog Owners

Are they doomed?

If you love dogs please read this and pass it on.

This is worrying stuff. How long before the domestic dog becomes extinct in the U.S.?

How long before our grandchildren are asking, "Grandpa, What's a dog?"



Animal Rights Wins In Dallas, California, Pennsylvania

by JOHN YATES

American Sporting Dog Alliance

http://www.americansportingdogalliance.org

asda@csonline.net

Wednesday was a black day for dog owners all across America, as
animal rights extremists posted legislative victories in Dallas,
California and Pennsylvania.

Dog owner advocacy groups fought hard in all three contests and had
clear majority support, but animal rights groups such as People for
the Ethical Treatment of Animals and the Humane Society of the United
States cashed in political chips with elected officials.

PETA and HSUS have been infiltrating local and state advisory boards
for many years, backed by a war chest exceeding $150 million,
hundreds of paid employees and thousands of volunteers.

Apathy remains th greatest problem faced by dog ownership advocacy
groups.

Wednesday's votes also highlighted what is rapidly becoming a
partisan division on animal rights legislation. In general, almost
all Republicans voted against the legislation, and almost all
Democrats voted for the bills. The Democratic Party appears to be
lining up behind the animal rights agenda in support of its
presumptive presidential candidate, Barrack Obama. Obama has
expressed strong support for animal rights.

Here is a summary of the four issues decided this week:

In Dallas, City Council voted 10-3 to pass an animal control
ordinance requiring mandatory pet sterilization, expensive permits to
own intact dogs and cats, mandatory microchipping and pet ownership
limits. The ordinance also bans tethering of dogs and imposes strict
requirements for keeping dogs outdoors. Home inspections also are
authorized.

In California, the Senate Local Government Committee voted 3-2 to
approve AB1634, which now will be sent to the Senate Appropriations
Committee. If this committee approves, it will be sent to the
legislature for a vote. This bill allows any person to act as a
vigilante and report any dog owner for an unsubstantiated violation
of any animal law. If any animal control officer agrees, the accused
person will have a choice between paying a fine or sterilizing the
animal. People who are accused of anything have no right to defend
themselves or to appeal. An accusation is automatic guilt.

In Pennsylvania, the House Rules Committee voted Tuesday to approve
HB2532, which is a de facto ban on tail docking, dewclaw removal and
ear cropping. In the absence of proof that the procedure was
performed by a veterinarian, the mere possession of a dog that has
had one of those three procedures subjects an owner to a criminal
citation for animal cruelty. This bill would destroy many rescue
operations, dog shows, competitive events and field trials in
Pennsylvania and result in the deaths of thousands of dogs. This bill
now goes to the full House for a vote, and then to the Senate.

Also in Pennsylvania, the House Agriculture Committee approved
amendments to the state dog and kennel law that fall short of changes
that were promised to dog owner advocacy groups. The actual text of
this legislation was not available at this writing, and a follow-up
report will be issued when the revised legislation is available. This
bill now goes to the full House for a vote, and then to the Senate.

Please see below for more detailed descriptions of all four issues.

Dog ownership advocates clearly outnumbered animal rights
sympathizers in public hearings on all four pieces of legislation, as
well as in written comments, emails and phone calls received by
elected officials. However, many of those officials chose to ignore
our voices, and that is doubly true of the Democrats. We are not
saying this to be partisan, as many of our officers and members are
loyal Democrats. We simply are stating a fact. Democrats voted
against animal owners this week by a shocking margin, and we urge dog
owners who are registered with this party to work to reverse this
policy.

Advocates of dog owners' rights also were hurt by the apathy of many
people who support us, but who did little or nothing to voice that
support to elected officials. At the Senate hearing in California,
for example, only about 10 people showed up. In Dallas, about 200 dog
ownership advocates attended the hearing, but that is a tiny
percentage of the estimated 300,000 pet owners in the city.
Attendance at the two Pennsylvania hearings was described as moderate.

Apathy by the large but silent majority of dog owners is a major
component of the animal rights strategy. While we outnumber them 100-
to-one, most of us don't get involved. In contrast, animal rights
groups rely on an almost religious fanaticism by their supporters to
gain a high percentage of participation.

The American Sporting Dog Alliance urges every dog owner in America
to join one or more of the several fine organizations that are
fighting for your rights. Each of these organizations has its own
niche, but all are excellent and deserve your support.

We welcome your membership and hope you will participate fully in our
programs. Please visit us online at
http://www.americansportingsdogalliance.org.

Please stand up and be counted now!

We also ask all dog owners who belong to field trial clubs,
sportsmen's organizations, show specialty clubs, breed clubs and
event clubs to urge those organizations to take an active political
role to defeat animal rights legislation.

The American Sporting Dog Alliance also is urging dog owners to
boycott all dog events in the City of Dallas for their own safety.
Under the terms of the ordinance, even a visitor to the city is
subject to citations, fines and dog confiscations. It is known that
PETA plans a protest at a July dog show in Dallas, and we expect them
to report show dog owners for alleged violations of the ordinance.
Because the Dallas animal commission is dominated by PETA members, we
expect that there will be a move to raid this dog show. All
professional handlers would be in violation of the possession limit
of six dogs, and none of the dogs are expected to have a required
Dallas breeding or intact permit.

If the Pennsylvania and California legislation becomes law, it will
not be safe for anyone to attend a field trial, dog show or
performance event in those states, or even to visit, pass through or
take a hunting trip there.

We urge all clubs to cancel or move planned events in Dallas now, and
also in Pennsylvania and California if their legislation is signed
into law. We believe that clubs have an ethical obligation to protect
the safety of participants and their dogs.

Continued apathy and non-involvement will doom dog ownership in
America, as well as hunting, field trials and other dog events. We
can't do it without you.

Here are the highlights of the four pieces of legislation that were
voted on this week.

California

We support the first part of AB1634, which calls for fines for dogs
that are allowed to roam and mandates sterilization after the third
offense.

However, the second part of the legislation violates basic
constitutional rights and human decency.

Here are the provisions of the second part of the legislation
(Italics are direct quotes, and words that are not italicized are our
comments):

· "The owner of a nonspayed or unneutered dog that is the
subject of a complaint may be cited and pay a civil penalty as
provided in this section. This civil penalty shall be in addition to
any fine, fee, or penalty imposed under any other provision of law or
local ordinance." In the first sentence, the committee
substituted "may" for "shall," which appears to leave the issuance of
a citation up to the discretion of an animal control officer.
However, the basis for this decision is not defined.

· "The owner of the dog shall pay the civil penalty to the
local animal control agency within 30 business days of the citation.
The local animal control agency shall waive the civil penalty if,
within 14 business days of the citation, the owner of the dog
presents written proof from a licensed veterinarian that the dog was
spayed or neutered." There is no provision for a dog owner to defend
him/herself in court or at a hearing, and no appeal is allowed. If
you are accused, you are guilty. Period. This is a violation of
constitutional guarantees of due process and equal protection under
the law.

· " 'Complaint' means an oral or written complaint to a local
animal control agency that alleges that the dog or the owner of the
dog has violated this division, any other provision of state law that
relates to dogs, or a local animal control ordinance. `Complaint'
also means the observation by an employee or officer of a local
animal control agency of behavior by a dog or the owner of a dog that
violates this division, any other provision of state law that relates
to dogs, or a local animal control ordinance." An example of what
this means is that a hunting or field trial dog that is in excellent
health and conditioned for performance could result in a complaint of
animal cruelty if anyone believes the dog looks thin.

· " `Local animal control agency' means any city or county
animal control agency or other entity responsible for enforcing
animal-related laws or local animal control ordinances." This
includes Humane Societies and other animal welfare organizations
empowered to enforce animal cruelty or other dog laws. Many members
of these groups support a radical animal rights agenda.

The Senate Local Government Committee approved this legislation by a
party-line 3-2 vote Wednesday, with Democrats in the majority. It now
goes to the Senate Committee on Appropriations, and then to the
Senate floor for a final vote.

Please contact members of the Appropriations Committee immediately to
voice opposition to the second half of this bill, and also individual
senators.

This link gives contact information for committee members:
http://www.senate.ca.gov/ftp/sen/committee/STAN...PPROP/_home1/PROF
ILE.HTM. The committee meets on Monday.

This link gives contact information for all senators:
http://www.senate.ca.gov/~newsen/senators/senators.htp. While Sen.
Michael Machado voted for this bill on Wednesday, he expressed many
concerns and might be convinced to change his vote.

Dallas

Here is a summary of the dog ordinance passed Wednesday by the Dallas
City Council by a 10-3 vote. The ordinance:

· Creates a permit for a dog or cat used for breeding or
competition. The cost of the permit is $70 annually for each animal,
plus the regular license fee of $30. There is no grace period or
exclusion provided for new residents or people who are visiting
Dallas, including participants in dog shows or other events. Visitors
can be cited, and we expect that they will be cited.

· Requires all other dogs or cats to be spayed or neutered.

· Limits a single household to a total of six cats and/or
dogs. People owning more than a half-acre of land would be allowed
eight. People who currently own a greater number of animals could
apply to the city to be allowed to keep their animals without
penalty, but they would not be allowed to buy a dog or breed a litter
of puppies until their number of dogs drops below the limit. The
ordinance applies to anyone who "harbors" more than six dogs, which
includes many visitors and participants in dog shows and other
events. Almost all professional handlers would be in this category,
as well as many owner/handlers.

· Subjects anyone who harbors a group of dogs that exceeds the
limits to unannounced inspections. This would include participants in
dog shows or other events.

· Mandates microchipping of all dogs and cats, including those
of visitors.

· Prohibits tethering of unsupervised dogs to trees or poles
except "for a period no longer than necessary for the owner to
complete a temporary task."

Forces owners to provide at least 150 square feet of space and a
building or designed doghouse for a dog confined outdoors.
And provides for confiscation of allegedly dangerous dogs, and other
penalties.

Please contact us at asda@csonlinenet if you would like to
participate in legal action or boycotts related to the Dallas
ordinance.

Pennsylvania

Dog owners in Pennsylvania were beset by two pieces of bad
legislation this week.

HB 2525 regulates a million dog owners and owners of 2,700 licensed
kennels in the state. It passed the House Agriculture Committee by a
17-12 vote Wednesday. All but one Republican (Rep. K. Boback) voted
against the bill, and all Democrats (the majority party) voted in
favor of it.

It appears that the final bill reflects some of the promises made to
dog ownership advocacy groups during the past several months of
negotiations, but that the Democrats have reneged on other promises.

Some dog owners groups have withdrawn their opposition to this
legislation, but the American Sporting Dog Alliance continues to
oppose it in its present form. While we support changes that affect
commercial breeders, these represent only a small part of HB 2525.
The rest of the bill has serious impacts on all dog and kennel
owners. The text of several amendments has not been published thus
far We will issue a full report on this legislation in the next
couple of days.

The other legislation is HB 2532, which provides what amounts to be a
de facto partial or complete ban on tail docking, ear cropping and
dewclaw removal by anyone except a licensed veterinarian. Although
most other dog owners' organizations have not taken a clear public
stance on this bill, the American Sporting Dog Alliance categorically
opposes it.

HB 2532 passed the House Judiciary Committee by a 28-1 vote Tuesday,
with only Republican Rep. T. Creighton voting "no."

The bill allows owners to dock the tails of puppies until they pass
three days of age, and to remove dewclaws during the first five days.
However, the burden of proof is placed on a dog's owner to prove that
this work was done legally before the age limits, or by a
veterinarian. It would be difficult for most dog owners to prove
this, and a large majority would not be able to prove it. The simple
possession of a dog with a docked tail or a lack of dewclaws would be
considered evidence of an animal cruelty violation, if the owner
cannot prove his/her innocence.

The bill continues a total ban against ear cropping, except by a
veterinarian, and anyone who is found in possession of a dog with
cropped ears is automatically guilty of criminal animal cruelty in
the absence of proof.

For all of these procedures, HB 2532 struck out a provision that
would have exempted dogs if their owners filed an affidavit with a
county treasurer that the work was done before the bill is passed.

That means a large majority of owners of many of the most popular
breeds will have no way of proving that they have complied with the
law. These procedures were done legally in the past on many dogs, or
legally by breeders in other states. In many cases, a dog owner has
no idea who performed these procedures. Thus, they would be guilty of
criminal animal cruelty for noncompliance.

This legislation will destroy rescue work for many breeds if it is
signed into law. Most dogs that are assisted by rescue groups, animal
shelters and private individuals either come from unknown sources, or
do not come with medical records. There will be no choice except to
euthanize these dogs, since it will be impossible to establish their
legality.

This legislation also will have a severe impact on people who live in
other states. On one level, Pennsylvanians will no longer be able to
buy puppies from dozens of breeds from nonresident breeders who
perform these procedures legally in their home states.

On another level, Pennsylvania professional trainers and handlers
will not be able to accept many dogs from out-of-state customers,
because proof will not be available.

But a larger impact will be on thousands of people who own dogs and
come to Pennsylvania for a vacation, to hunt, or to compete in field
trials, dog shows and other events. Anyone who brings a dog with a
docked tail, missing dewclaws or cropped ears into Pennsylvania is
subject to arrest for criminal animal cruelty charges.

This will affect many very popular breeds of dogs, such as almost all
Continental breeds of pointing dogs, flushing dogs, terriers and many
working dogs, such as rottweilers and doberman pinchers.

The bill now moves to the full House for a vote. Please contact your
own legislator and as many others as possible to express opposition
to this legislation. Contact information can be found at:
http://www.legis.state.pa.us/cfdocs/legis/home/..._information/repr
esentatives_alpha.cfm.

Here is a link to the text of the legislation:
http://www.legis.state.pa.us/CFDOCS/Legis/PN/Public/btCheck.cfm?
txtType=HTM&sessYr=2007&sessInd=0&billBody=H&billT yp=B&billNbr=2532&pn
=4030

The American Sporting Dog Alliance represents owners, hobby breeders
and professionals who work with breeds of dogs that are used for
hunting. We are a grassroots movement working to protect the rights
of dog owners, and to assure that the traditional relationships
between dogs and humans maintains its rightful place in American
society and life. Please visit us on the web at
http://www.americansportingdogalliance.org. Our email is
ASDA@csonline.net. Complete directions to join by mail or online are
found at the bottom left of each page.

The American Sporting Dog Alliance also needs your help so that we
can continue to work to protect the rights of dog owners. Your
membership, participation and support are truly essential to the
success of our mission. We are funded solely by the donations of our
members, and maintain strict independence.

PLEASE CROSS-POST AND FORWARD THIS REPORT TO YOUR FRIENDS

Paul Watson' big booboo

Kerry Diotte

Thu, April 10, 2008

Animal activists often hurt their own causes

By KERRY DIOTTE

I love critters as much as most people.

I've grown up with cats and dogs and hamsters - and treasured them all.

Having been raised in northern Ontario where we owned a cabin (or camp, as it was called there), I also hunted grouse at an early age.

I've since lost my love of that and now prefer to photograph wildlife rather than see it dead on my plate.

Stories of animal abuse make me feel sick to my stomach. I truly admire people in the field of animal welfare who try to improve the lot of our feathered and furry friends.

What I don't understand, though, is why some animal advocates become so strident in their cause that there's a backlash and they wind up crippling their case.

Most people were rightly saddened to read news about the recent drowning deaths of four Quebec sealers from Iles-de-la Madeleine. They drowned when their disabled boat was being towed and it capsized.

But hard-core animal rights activists were actually rejoicing, not unlike religious extremists who cheer terrorist attacks that kill innocent people.

Sun Media received a few letters from animal rights types expressing their outright joy that seal hunters died.

I'm not a big fan of seeing seals killed, but it's been a way of life for people on the East Coast and in the North for generations.

Anti-sealing protesters have, over the years, forced slightly more humane hunting practices, at the least.

Certainly there's more need for improvement, since seals are still clubbed to death on the ice. New regulations require hunters to also slit their arteries in the process.

People can't help but view the clubbing to death of any animal as brutal. Can you imagine the uproar if cows, pigs and sheep were killed that way? It's not the most humane way of harvesting animals.

But radical animal rights people tend to sabotage their own causes by expressing outrageous beliefs and using questionable tactics to try to win their cause.

Witness the recent comments of Paul Watson, head of the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society.

As friends and family mourned the deaths of the Quebec sealers, Watson told the media he considered the killing of young seals "a greater tragedy."

Watson made those comments after hearing quotes from a sealer who said he felt helpless watching the trawler capsize that led to the death of the four hunters.

Watson, who obviously has little tact, heart or common sense, chose this particular time to send out his abrasive and cruel comments via a news release.

"I can't think of anything that defines helplessness and fear more than a seal pup on the ice that can't swim or escape as it is approached by some cigarette-smoking ape with a club," Watson said.

"These men are sadistic baby killers and that might offend some people but it is the unvarnished truth - they are vicious killers who are now pleading for sympathy because some of their own died while engaged in a viciously brutal activity."

Those comments even made the head of Canada's Green party resign from the advisory board of the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society.

It all goes to show that if you want a better world for animals, you shouldn't act like an untamed one yourself. People listen to reasonable arguments and campaigns. But most tune out wild-eyed radicals.

Source: http://www.edmontonsun.com/News/Columnists/Diotte_Kerry/2008/04/10/5242246-sun.html

Rat flood hits Bangledesh

Try telling these people a rat is a pig is a boy. Rare flowering of the bamboo causes "rat flood" in Bangladesh. Last Updated: Saturday, 22 March 2008, 12:06 GMT Rat infestation hits Bangladesh By Mark Dummett BBC News, Bangladesh An infestation of rats is creating severe food shortages in the impoverished Chittagong Hill Tracts region of Bangladesh, close to the borders of India and Burma. Sangram, a rat catcher in the remote Bangladeshi village of Theihkyong, has never been busier and nor has his work been as important as it is now. Sangram has placed rat traps along field boundaries That is because the fields surrounding the village have been stripped by an invading army of rodents, which villagers say crossed over the nearby border with India three months ago. It has become more than a job. Sangram now needs the rats to keep his family members alive. They eat two bowls of smoked rat a day, accompanied by the wild roots he finds in the forest. "My wife, my five children and I normally eat rice, but the rats have destroyed everything," the grim-faced Sangram said. "All we have left are the rats and these wild potatoes." We are in big trouble and want people to realise that Lal Jinja, priest They live in a traditional one-room house - the roof is of thatched grass - the walls and floors weaved strands of bamboo. It sits on high stilts. There is space underneath for a harvest of rice, maize and vegetables but this year it is empty. Theihkyong is a poor village with two churches and a community school. But there is no clinic, no electricity, no running water or telephones. The people here have to fend for themselves. They are proud of their independence and their identity as members of one of Bangladesh's tribal minorities, but when something bad happens, they have nothing to fall back on. The rat minefield The rat traps that Sangram looks after are huge and ingenious. A long bamboo fence divides two fields but every so often Sangram has left open a booby-trapped entrance. When the rat walks in, it triggers the trap, and a bamboo pole, weighted with soil, drops with a thump. He walks along the fence throwing the squashed, light-brown rats into a basket he wears on his back. At home they will be strung together and smoked over an open fire until they are black and hard. Sangram also checks uninhabited houses that dot the fields. Inside are dozens of carefully concealed snares. It is the villagers' revenge. They have turned their desolated hillsides into a rat minefield. They have caught thousands of them. In the community centre of Theihkyong they gather to show me baskets of dried rat tails. They have kept them as proof of the crisis now facing the village, a crisis that outsiders refused to believe for months. "We are in big trouble and want people to realise that," Theihkyong's priest Lal Jinja said. "We want people to see these rat tails so they can understand our suffering." The government and relief agencies are finally beginning to believe them and are waking up to the problem, which extends far beyond the boundaries of this single village. Occupying force According to the UN's development programme, about 125,000 people have been affected by food shortages and the rats. Some have started to receive aid, but unless more arrives soon these people will be cut off from the outside world, without any food to eat for months. The villagers have collected thousands of rat tails That is because the monsoon is on its way. There are not many bridges and it will be impossible to ford the rivers once the rains come. The starving communities sit in the hills along Bangladesh's south-eastern borders with India and Burma. It is an impoverished region called the Chittagong Hill Tracts, where the indigenous Christian and Buddhist tribes complain of decades of mistreatment by the central authorities. The only government institution that is decently funded is the army. It says it needs a large presence to defend the region against a myriad of tribal rebel groups from India, Burma and Bangladesh itself. But locals say it sometimes acts like an occupying force. The looming famine is proof of this neglect, as the crisis - and the rat invasion - were entirely predictable. It happens to this region roughly every 50 years. That is how often the bamboo forests that cover the hillsides blossom. Their seeds are high in protein and, when the rats eat them, they breed four times faster than normal. After their numbers swell and they finish eating the bamboo seeds, they move into people's fields and eat their crops. The blossoming, the rat problem, and the food shortages began two years ago in India then moved into Bangladesh in January and have now headed south into Burma as well. The last rat plague in 1959 caused devastation just over the border in the Indian state of Mizoram. The people there suffered so much and were so appalled by the lack of help from the government, they launched a rebellion that lasted 20 years. In the Chittagong Hill Tracts, many people remember that time as well. One of them is the 93-year-old king of the Marma tribe, Raja Aung Shue Prue Chowdhury. He tells me that the rats then "were as big as pigs". Source" http://news.BBC.co.UK/2/hi/programmes/from_our_own_correspondent/7307117.stm

I have seen the light

The following statement I copied straight from the Voice for Animals website:

"Animals are not commodities to be bought and sold. Stores who participate in this, and breeders who supply them will one day, in an enlightened future, be seen for who they are... slave traders."

Dear Voice for Animals,

I am writing to tell you that I have finally seen the light.

It seems you were right all along. The buying, selling and keeping of animals is nothing but slavery, they should not be owned but should be free to live their own lives, make their own decisions, go where and when they please.

As of today, I intend to turn over a new leaf. Liberation, not slavery is to be the order of the day.

This morning when I got up, I went outside and opened the gate. I told all my animals that they are now liberated. They can do as they please. They all quickly ran out through the gate and I closed it behind them.

Slavery is dead.

Yes, slavery is as outdated as sending small boys up sooty chimneys.

No more will I have to carry heavy bales of hay and straw in the morning before I go to work, in the dark, and at night when I get home, again in the dark, when the temperature is below freezing and the wind is howling, so that my animals can be comfortable and well fed.

No more will I have to defrost the drinker, when the temperature is -25C, so that my animals can get a drink.

No more will I have to shovel excrement into a wheelbarrow then push that heavy wheelbarrow across rough ground before tipping it, then going back to do it again, so that my animals can be clean.

No more will I have to mend the fence, in the dark, with frozen fingers and with the flashlight between my teeth, when the temperature is below freezing and there is a gale blowing, so that my animals can be safe.

No more will I have to drive to the auction mart to buy the aforementioned hay and straw, load said hay and straw onto a trailer, drive it home and unload it, so that my animals can be comfortable through the cold Canadian winter.

No more will I have to drive to the store that closes before I officially finish work, so I have to leave early, to buy oats, minerals, salt, dog, cat, rabbit and chicken food, so that my animals can not only be fed but well nourished.

No more will I have to drive to the aforementioned store, having left work early, to buy wood and nails to mend the aforementioned fence.

No more will I have to stop the car at the end of the drive to open the gate, in the dark, drive through, stop the car again, and close the gate behind me so my animals cannot wander on to the road where they might cause an accident or be injured.

No more will I have to stop the car at the other end of the aforementioned drive, get out, open another gate, drive through, get out again, and close the gate behind me so that the animals cannot get at the aforementioned hay and straw and spoil it, which they surely would do.

No more will I have to get up in the middle of the night to let out dogs that forgot to pee when I let them out before I went to bed.

No more will I have to get up in the middle of the night during calving and lambing season to check that the cows and ewes haven't dropped their babies in the snow and wandered off and forgotten about them, as some of them are prone to do.

No more will I have to take the aforementioned babies into my house and wrap them in warm blankets after the aforementioned mothers have dropped them in the snow and wandered off and left them, as I have had to do in the past.

No more will I have to walk for miles so that my dogs can have some exercise.

No more will I risk getting scratched, bitten, kicked, trampled, or knocked over because the aforementioned animals don't realize how big and strong they are and how weak and feeble I am.

No more will I have to go to work to earn the money to pay for all the aforementioned items.

And as I am not going to work, I will sit around and watch TV, or play cards or talk to people via instant messaging.

I will probably be sued when someone hits a cow that is laying in the road in the middle of the night, and writes off their car.

I will worry about them, knowing that they are having to scrape away the snow to find a few blades of last years grass, that they have no shelter when the temperature drops to below freezing and the wind is howling, and that they are at constant risk from disease carrying oand predatory critters, farmers guns, and rusty old machinery that litters the Alberta prairies, but my conscience will be clear, because they are free.

Within a few months I will get depressed and maybe suicidal, because there will be nothing to live for.

I will have to see a psychiatrist and take medication and become a burden on society.

But that's all right, because even when I feel like shit I will know that I have done the right thing in letting my animals go free.

Oh wait a minute, what's that noise I hear? It sounds like mooing, bleating, humming, clucking barking, neighing and braying.

My animals are all standing by the gate waiting to be let back in. I wonder why that is? I know you won't believe this, but they think having a human slave is preferable to having to fend for themselves.

Oh well, back to the grindstone.

Slavery is alive and well and living in Alberta.

Yours,

One of the unenlightened ones

How to distinguish between animal rights and animal welfare.

Animal Rights activist Is more likely to:

Live in an urban area
Be a female teen or young adult (I know there are lots of granny activists and guys but they are in the minority)
Be readily influenced by what they see on a website or in an ad because they don't know any different
Be a brainless follower
Have a high disposable income
Have much free time for demonstration, letter writing campaigns etc.
Rarely, if ever, interact with animals
Make statements like, "I love pigs", when they really mean "I watched Charlotte's Web and Babe"
Be a vegetarian or vegan
Protest outside KFC
Assume animals have the same wants, needs, and reasoning skills as humans.
Less likely to be compassionate towards humans.

Animal Welfare advocate is more likely to:
Live in a rural or suburban area
Be of any age or gender
Learn from their own experiences
Know that information put out by animal rights organizations such as PETA and HSUS is mostly propaganda and lies.
Have more brain power than the average ARA
Have a lower disposable income.
Have little free time because they are busy caring for animals.
Interact with animals regularly, most likely on a daily basis.
Make statements like, "I still like pigs even though I have been bitten, trampled on, squashed and peed on by them numerous times"
Eat meat
Eat in McDonald's because KFC is too expensive.
Know that animals are animals and that they do not have rights.
More likely to be compassionate towards humans.

Summary

Animal welfare advocates care about animals.
Animal Rights activists care about denying other people their liberty.

A few facts:
HSUS is the wealthiest AR group on the planet. It spends $2million a year on travel expense alone keeping its multi national agenda going.

If animals rights activists have their way all these things will become distant memory:

Lab Testing, Aquariums, Bullfighting, Circuses, Equestrian competition, Fishing, Greyhound racing, Horse racing, Horse-drawn carriages, Hunting, Magic shows using animals, Movies with animal actors, Pet ownership, Ranching, Rodeos, Whaling, and Zoos among other things are all in danger.

Zoocheck and WSPCA

Both these organizations claim to be animal welfare groups working for the benefit of animals. Read their information carefully, look at the way the information is presented, and look at the way they beg for donations, then decide for yourself.

In my opinion they are animal rights groups.
http://www.wspa.ca/index.asp
http://www.zoocheck.com/