Michael Markarian: Animals & Politics

Another Pet Snared in Cruel Federal Trap

It’s rare for a family pet to survive a close encounter with one of the deadly predator control devices set by the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Wildlife Services program. In fact, over the past few years, I’ve shared several heart-breaking stories about dogs like Bea, a young American Brittany spaniel, who, in May 2008 suffered a terrifying, excruciating death during a hiking trip on public land in Utah, when she sniffed and licked a sheep carcass that had been laced with highly toxic Compound 1080 poison. And just this past December, I told you about a border collie in Oregon named Maggie who was strangled after being caught in a body-gripping kill trap set by Wildlife Services just 20 feet from her family’s property line. Bea, Maggie and countless other animals have suffered and died as a result of this agency’s outdated approach to solving wildlife conflicts and its indiscriminate killing and maiming of non-target species.

Bella narrowly survived an encounter with a snare.
Photo: Robert Norie

Fortunately for a beautiful husky named Bella and her owner, forester Robert Norie, her encounter with a snare set by federal agents did not end in death. She survived the ordeal, but as you will read, Bella still paid a horrible price when she came across these landmines of the natural world largely financed by our tax dollars.

In August 2010, while accompanying her owner on a trip to conduct a tree survey in Boise National Forest in Idaho, Bella wandered into a snare set for wolves by Wildlife Services and nearly died after struggling in the trap for more than eight hours. When Norie found her, Bella’s whole body was hopelessly tangled in the wire snare. She was caked with blood and had almost completely chewed off her right hind leg in a futile attempt to free herself from the cable. Norie and his coworkers managed to release Bella from the snare, and despite being in a remote area, Norie was able to get Bella to a veterinarian in time to save her life, but not her leg. Norie also suffered blood poisoning and had to spend four days in the hospital for treatment from a bite inflicted by an injured and terrified Bella while he was working to cut the cable away from her body.

While Bella survived the ordeal thanks to the heroic efforts of her devoted family, others like her are much less fortunate—left to languish in these traps for days, if not weeks, before finally succumbing to their injuries, dehydration, starvation or exposure.

Apparently, such is the case at Oregon State University where we have just learned that for several years now, Wildlife Services has been using the same types of cruel, indiscriminate snares that maimed Bella to injure and kill animals who wander into them near the school’s sheep farm. According to eyewitness reports from a family whose property lies adjacent to the sheep farm, deer fawns, raccoons and coyotes are routinely captured and left to suffer for days, if not weeks, in snares set by Wildlife Services along the farm’s fence line. The property owner says that one day she found a dead coyote who “had completely wrapped itself in and out of the wire fence in a struggle to get free. The other hind foot was missing entirely. I later learned that undoubtedly this coyote had formerly been caught in another trapping device and had chewed its foot off in order to escape.” On another day, she found “a live raccoon dangling on the fence, caught by the rear leg in the same type of snare trap as the coyote. This raccoon had similarly woven itself through the fence, trying to escape the snare's unyielding grip. I took video and photos of the struggling raccoon that had haplessly gotten caught in a snare set to catch another animal.”

Please send a polite message to Edward Ray, the president of OSU, asking him to suspend Wildlife Services' indiscriminate and inhumane trapping practices at the school, along with its contract, until an independent and public review is completed.

This tragedy is compounded by archaic state regulations that allow trappers as many as 30 days to check traps set for certain types of traps, similar to the one that nearly suffocated and killed Kiera, a Wheaten terrier, just 10 days ago while walking along the Metolius River in Oregon. It’s high time the Oregon Fish and Wildlife Commission adopt new rules to prevent animals from languishing interminably in these cruel and barbaric devices.

The federal program, too, is in need of reform. Wildlife Services has been killing animals for more than 80 years, using inhumane and indiscriminate methods, catching endangered species and family pets in the crossfire, with taxpayers footing a large share of the bill. It’s time for our government to do better, and find a new way forward.

Canine Craziness in Idaho

Good ideas, and bad ideas, often originate in state legislatures. Last year I singled out a Utah bill to allow the killing of any animal thought to be feral—with bludgeoning, shooting, and decapitation—as raising the bar for legislative lunacy. Fortunately that misguided proposal was sent to the legislative litter box, and Utah lawmakers instead passed a forward-thinking bill to sanction trap-neuter-return (TNR) policies for feral cats.

This year’s prize for the pooper scooper of all state bills goes to Idaho state Senate Agriculture Committee Chairman Jeff Siddoway, a Republican sheep rancher from Terreton, who has taken anti-wolf hysteria in the West to a whole new level: Siddoway introduced a bill last week to allow the use of domestic dogs as live bait to lure and kill wolves. His legislation would allow hunters to tether man’s best friend out in the woods, using the dogs’ cries for help to draw in wolves to be shot and killed when they attack the hapless pets.

Historically, the wolf is no stranger to this type of ruthless and relentless persecution. They were eradicated from much of their range in the lower 48 by the use of bounties, poisons, and traps. They were shot from the air by marksmen in planes and helicopters. Cubs were smoked out of their dens and clubbed with shovels when they emerged. This cruel, gruesome war did not end until nearly every last wolf was killed.

Now that the species has begun to recover, the Obama administration has stripped them of federal protections, and turned over wolf management to the states with retrograde policies determined by anti-wolf politicians. Under pressure from the sport hunting and livestock industries, Idaho’s wildlife agency has already allowed the use of steel-jawed leghold traps and aerial gunning, in addition guns and bows, to increase the number of wolves killed.  Some in Idaho have even called for a resumption of wolf bounties, as though the frontier mentality of “the only good wolf is a dead wolf” has returned in full force.

But to make domestic dogs the victims of Idaho’s war on wolves is beyond reprehensible. While ranchers in Idaho surely support the right of livestock owners to protect their herds and flocks, we hope they would join us in finding the prospect of household pets—or for that matter, any domestic animal—being staked out in the woods to serve as live bait an unacceptably cruel practice.

Rather than searching for ever-more grisly means of killing wolves, Idaho’s principal goal should be the resolution of conflicts between livestock producers and predators. Such efforts should focus primarily on providing ranchers with technical guidance and assistance on ways to protect livestock from predation through the implementation of a wide range of site-specific non-lethal techniques including the use of guard animals, fencing, shed-lambing, and closely-monitored calf and lambing seasons. When these methods fail to provide adequate relief, lethal control should be used as a last resort, and in a way that targets individual problem animals rather than entire populations.

And no matter what, don’t add to the body count by using domestic dogs—the descendants of wolves—as unwitting tools for the killing.

It's Time to Ban Horse Transport in Double-Decker Trucks

Proponents and opponents of horse slaughter don’t agree on much these days, but there’s one thing they have in common: There is consensus that transporting horses stacked on top of each other crammed into double-decker trailers is unsafe and inhumane. The double-deckers are designed to haul smaller animals such as cows, pigs, and sheep. Horses are taller and often slip and fall because they can’t raise or lower their heads for balance. They are often unable to get up and are all-too-frequently trampled to death. They slip on steep and narrow metal ramps, placing them at risk of serious injuries. There have been grisly accidents leaving trucks overturned and horses suffering in fields of blood and broken bones on our roads and highways.

A recent Government Accountability Office (GAO) report on horse slaughter recommended banning double-decker trucks, and the U.S. Department of Agriculture has finalized a rule prohibiting their use in transport to any point, intermediate or final, en route to a horse slaughter plant. Logically, if it’s an unsafe vehicle for driving a truckload of horses to slaughter, then it’s an unsafe vehicle for driving a truckload of horses elsewhere, too. Double-deckers simply can’t be tall enough, no matter how they’re designed, to provide adequate space for horses and still meet highway clearance rules. Bipartisan legislation in Congress would codify the ban on double-deckers and apply it to the interstate transport of any equines. It’s championed by U.S. Senators Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J., and Mark Kirk, R-Ill., and U.S. Representatives Ed Whitfield, R-Ky., Steve Cohen, D-Tenn., and Andy Harris, R-Md., and supported by a wide range of groups including The Humane Society of the United States and the American Veterinary Medical Association.

As the House and Senate work to reauthorize major legislation dealing with highway transportation, committees in both chambers have included language banning horse transport in double-deckers. The Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee, with the leadership of Chairman John Rockefeller, D-W.Va., approved the double-decker provision in December as part of the Commercial Motor Vehicle Safety Enhancement Act of 2011, and last week it was passed by the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, with strong support from Chairman John Mica, R-Fla., and Ranking Member Nick Rahall, D-W.Va.

With bipartisan support from both chambers, and the backing of a diverse coalition of stakeholders, you’d think the ban on double-deckers would be a slam dunk. But that’s not the way Washington works. In the Senate, where any one member can send a sensible measure careening off the legislative highway, Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus, D-Mont., who’s in charge of the $13 billion needed to fund the bill, has announced that he will block it. He says that the rodeo is big business in Montana, and the rodeo operators want to keep using double-deckers to transport horses—never mind the public safety hazards on our roads, the welfare of the horses, or the ability of the rodeo industry to continue operating simply with more secure modes of transporting the animals it relies on for its events and its economic success. It’s a race to the bottom and a least common denominator method of lawmaking, when one narrow interest can overturn an entire piece of legislation—like a double-decker truck overturned on the road.

When Senator Mark Kirk speaks in favor of the legislation, he refers to an accident he witnessed in Wadsworth, Ill., in 2007, when a double-decker tractor trailer carrying 59 Belgian draft horses crashed, mangling the trailer and killing 15 of the horses, overwhelming community responders and shutting down highway traffic for more than five hours. “Besides being an inhumane way to transport horses, double-deck trailers pose a major safety threat to the drivers of the imbalanced, oversized vehicles, as well as to other motorists,” Kirk said. “Unfortunately, crashes due to these factors have occurred, and the results of the accidents are devastating.”

This is the kind of common-sense sentiment that should prevail in the Senate—not the narrow-minded obstructionism and obstinacy that Senator Baucus is exhibiting here.

U.S. House Passes Bill to Protect Wild Horses

The U.S. House of Representatives late yesterday, by unanimous voice vote, passed H.R. 306, the Corolla Wild Horses Protection Act, introduced by Rep. Walter Jones, R-N.C. This legislation, strongly supported by HSLF and other animal protection groups, will ensure the protection, preservation and responsible management of a small herd of wild Colonial Spanish Mustangs roaming freely on the northernmost Outer Banks of Currituck County, North Carolina.

The majestic Corolla wild horses have been a historic and revered herd for nearly five hundred years, but currently the population is at risk of being reduced to only 60 horses. Experts agree that the herd must be managed at a healthy population level of 110 to 130 animals to maintain genetic viability. H.R. 306 wisely supports these science-based findings, without any cost to the federal government.

“The Corolla horses are a key part of North Carolina’s heritage. They’re also an important element of the Outer Banks economy,” said Rep. Jones. “North Carolina has designated the Colonial Spanish Mustang as our State Horse and we must make sure they survive for future generations to enjoy.”

The stable and successful wild horse program that the National Park Service has administered on Assateague Island using PZP contraception as its primary management tool shows that these populations can provide generations of Americans with inspiration and appreciation without requiring expensive and controversial removals.

We are grateful to Rep. Jones for his dedication and perseverance to protect these majestic wild horses on the Outer Banks. With so few wild horse herds left in the eastern United States, the Senate should quickly pass this important legislation.

Podcast: An Egg-Citing Bill, Rating Federal Policymakers

Today I posted the latest installment of the “Animals & Politics” podcast, hosted by Patrick Ferrise, in which we discuss the new legislation in Congress to improve the treatment of egg-laying hens, and our 2011 ratings for federal lawmakers and the Obama administration. We have an unusual alliance between animal welfare groups and the egg industry, and a unique opportunity this year to pass consensus-driven legislation to help hundreds of millions of hens nationwide. We also have to measure the outcomes on animal protection issues at the federal level in the previous year, and having yardsticks such as the 2011 Humane Scorecard allows us to chart our progress and take stock of where we are as a movement. I hope you’ll take a listen to today’s podcast by clicking here, and then take action by asking your members of Congress to support and co-sponsor H.R. 3798, the Egg Products Inspection Act Amendments of 2012.

Michael Markarian - Animals & Politics Podcast #4

Michigan Launches Full-Scale Campaign Against Animal Fighting

A trio of bills before the Michigan Legislature takes full-scale aim at dogfighting and cockfighting in creative and meaningful ways that could serve as a model for other states. These bills have passed the Michigan Senate as well as the House Judiciary Committee and now await a House floor vote before going to Governor Rick Snyder for his consideration.

First, S.B. 356 would allow for the seizure of property and other assets purchased with profits gained from animal fighting. Second, S.B. 357 would define any property used to house an animal fighting operation as a public nuisance. And finally, S.B. 358 would include animal fighting in the state’s racketeering laws, reflecting a growing recognition that dogfighting and cockfighting rings are organized crime. While mafia-owned illegal casinos use slot machines as gambling devices, illegal cockfighters and dogfighters use live animals who are often fought to their bloody deaths.

Including animal fighting under a state’s organized crime law is a reasonable policy approach when you consider the extensive, multi-state underground networks involved in these cruel trades. The elaborate security measures employed to avoid detection by law enforcement, the massive amounts of money gambled, breeding operations, underground magazines and transport services used to move dogs between kennels are all part of the animal fighting underworld.

Like any underground crime, dogfighting and cockfighting only thrive because people spend money on it. These individuals don’t walk into a bar on Main Street and accidentally stumble across a dogfight. They knowingly seek out the criminal activity at clandestine locations, and they often whisper secret passwords to enter. They pay hundreds or thousands of dollars in admission fees and gambling bets, generating the bulk of the revenue for this illegal enterprise. And they provide cover for dogfighters and cockfighters, who blend into crowds at the first sign of a police raid to evade prosecution. For enforcement actions to be complete, we need to crack down on the entire cast of characters involved in the enterprise.

What’s more, the link between animal fighting and other dangerous crimes is well-established. A study by the Chicago Police Department in 2004 revealed “a startling propensity for offenders charged with crimes against animals to commit other violent offenses toward human victims.” The study also concluded: 70 percent of those arrested for animal cruelty, including dogfighting, over a four-year period in Chicago had also been arrested for other felonies; 65 percent had past arrests for battery and 70 percent had been arrested for illegal narcotics.

A dogfighting raid in Monroe County, Michigan, a year ago underscored these statistics. The high-stakes dogfight attracted individuals from Georgia, Indiana, Missouri and Ohio. Authorities seized more than $40,000 in cash, as well as firearms, cocaine and other drugs.  Several dogs, victims of injuries sustained in the fights, were already dead when law enforcement arrived on the scene.

This should give pause to anyone concerned about public safety and animal welfare. Taking animal fighters off the streets will help to curtail other violent crimes and make our communities safer for all—human and animal.

The bills before the Michigan Legislature are moving forward thanks to the leadership and work of three Michigan senators. Senators Rick Jones (R-24), Bert Johnson (D-2) and Steve Bieda (D-9) are championing this effort to save animals from cruelty and death in fighting pits.

Our friends at the Wayne County Prosecutor’s Office Animal Protection Unit and the Michigan Humane Society initiated and support these bills, and a handful of other states have attempted similar concepts. Creative thinking, fresh ideas and dogged pursuit of sound and effective policies will get us one step closer to eradicating the cruel enterprise of animal fighting once and for all—a day that cannot come soon enough.

New Bill for Hens Provides New Pathway Forward

A year ago at the president’s State of the Union address, Democrats and Republicans sat together, in a show of solidarity for Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, D-Ariz., severely injured at a mass shooting in her district. Tonight’s address is likely to be very different in tone, and in fact, the unity and cohesion briefly exhibited last year on Capitol Hill has largely waned. It’s rare to see lawmakers of different parties and different viewpoints talking to each other, let alone sitting together.

It’s this backdrop of ideological gridlock and deepening partisan divides that makes yesterday’s introduction of H.R. 3798, the Egg Products Inspection Act Amendments of 2012, especially stand out as politically unique. The main supporters of the legislation are the United Egg Producers, which represents 88% of the nation’s egg industry, and The Humane Society of the United States, the nation’s largest animal welfare organization. The bill was introduced by a bipartisan group led by Rep. Kurt Schrader, D-Ore., the only veterinarian in Congress, with Reps. Elton Gallegly, R-Calif., Sam Farr, D-Calif., and Jeff Denham, R-Calif.

Take action to support H.R. 3798.

The bill will codify an agreement between The HSUS and UEP to phase out barren battery cages and replace them with new, enriched colony housing systems that provide each egg-laying hen with nearly double the amount of current space; require environmental enrichments, such as perches, nesting boxes, and scratching areas, allowing hens to express natural behaviors; mandate labeling on egg cartons to inform consumers of the method used to produce the eggs, such as “eggs from caged hens” or “eggs from cage-free hens”; and provide other improvements such as banning forced starvation molting and prohibiting excessive ammonia levels in henhouses.

The HSUS and UEP have been long-time adversaries, but have come together and identified a solution for housing 280 million laying hens that balances animal welfare and the economic realities of the industry. As Rep. Schrader noted, “I take my hat off to both organizations for putting aside their historical differences and working together to reach a deal that provides certainty for our farmers while providing improved conditions for the hens.”

While all the credible animal protection groups strongly support this bill—including HSLF, the ASPCA, Farm Sanctuary, Animal Legal Defense Fund, Mercy for Animals, and several others—there are a few fringe critics who sit on the sidelines and carp about how it doesn’t go far enough. They have no pathway of reform to suggest, only obstructionism and piety. They don’t understand the political dynamics that exist, and that this bill can bring real relief to these animals who are suffering in the here and now and need our help.

The nation needs this kind of problem solving, and the Congress should enthusiastically embrace an agreement between all the major stakeholders. Please contact your members of Congress today and urge them to support H.R. 3798, which will not only improve the treatment of hundreds of millions of hens, but will also send a message that our country can find bipartisan solutions even to the most difficult and divisive problems.

Hot Off the Press: 112th Congress Midterm Humane Scorecard

Last month I provided a look at our 2011 congressional year in review for animals, and noted many of the achievements and setbacks during the first half of the 112th Congress. We made progress for animal protection on a number of fronts, especially increased funding to crack down on puppy mills and horse soring despite a very tough budget climate, and laid the groundwork for important policies to be considered in 2012.

I’m pleased to announce today that the Humane Society Legislative Fund has posted the final version of the 2011 Humane Scorecard, where you can track the performance of your federal lawmakers on key animal protection issues during last year. We rated legislators based on their voting behavior on measures such as agribusiness subsidies, lethal predator control, and the Endangered Species Act; their cosponsorship of priority bills on puppy mills, horse slaughter, animal fighting, and chimps in research; their support for funding the enforcement of animal welfare laws; and their leadership on animal protection. All of the priority bills whose cosponsorships we’re counting enjoy strong bipartisan support; in the House, each of the four now has more than 150 cosponsors.

The Humane Scorecard is not a perfect measuring tool, but creating some reasonable yardstick and allowing citizens to hold lawmakers accountable is central to our work. The HSUS historically and in recent years HSLF have been publishing the Humane Scorecard since the 103rd Congress (which covered 1993-1994), so this annual congressional snapshot has been available for nearly two decades. Additionally, The HSUS has just published its report card on the Obama administration, measuring the performance of the federal regulatory agencies on animal welfare issues, and giving the administration a subpar grade of C-minus for 2011.

When the Humane Scorecard comes out each year, it helps clarify how the animal protection movement is doing geographically, by party affiliation, and in other categories. It helps us chart our course for animals by seeing where we have been effective, and where we need to improve. And much more needs to be done, as we have just begun 2012 and are pushing animal protection policy issues forward in the second half of the 112th Congress.

Here are a few of the most important statistics from 2011:

• A bipartisan group of 30 Senators and 97 Representatives covering 38 states, three U.S. territories, and the District of Columbia led as prime sponsors of pro-animal legislation and/or scored a perfect 100—nearly one-third of the Senate and one-quarter of the House.
• The average Senate score was a 41, with Senate Democrats averaging 58, Senate Republicans averaging 22, and Senate Independents averaging 100.
• The average House score was a 42, with House Democrats averaging 70, and House Republicans averaging 19.
• Fifteen Senators scored 100 or 100+.
• Eleven Senators scored zero.
• Sixty-five Representatives scored 100 or 100+.
• One hundred ten Representatives scored zero.
• The New England region led the pack with an average Senate score of 83 and an average House score of 69, followed closely by the Mid-Atlantic region with a Senate score of 62 and a House score of 67, and the West with a Senate score of 60 and a House score of 55.
• The Rocky Mountains and the Southeast were at the bottom with average Senate scores of 28 and 26, respectively, and average House scores of 22 and 26.
• California, Connecticut, and Vermont were the only states with an average Senate score of 100.
• Georgia and Kansas were the only states in which both Senators scored zero.
• Connecticut, Hawaii, Maine, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and Vermont were the only states with an average House score above 80, and of them, only Rhode Island had an average House score of 100.
• Alabama, Arkansas, Idaho, Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Dakota, and Wyoming were the only states with an average House score below 10.

I’d like to give special thanks to the following three Senators and 26 Representatives who scored the highest possible 100+, meaning they had a perfect score on animal protection and also provided key leadership on a particular issue or issues:

• Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.)
• Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine)
• Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.)
• Rep. Raúl Grijalva (D-Ariz.)
• Rep. Lois Capps (D-Calif.)
• Rep. Sam Farr (D-Calif.)
• Rep. Bob Filner (D-Calif.)
• Rep. George Miller (D-Calif.)
• Rep. Brad Sherman (D-Calif.)
• Rep. Lynn Woolsey (D-Calif.)
• Rep. Colleen Hanabusa (D-Hawaii)
• Rep. Mike Quigley (D-Ill.)
• Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.)
• Rep. Ed Markey (D-Mass.)
• Rep. Gary Peters (D-Mich.)
• Rep. Chris Smith (R-N.J.)
• Rep. Gary Ackerman (D-N.Y.)
• Rep. Michael Grimm (R-N.Y.)
• Rep. Steve Israel (D-N.Y.)
• Rep. Ed Towns (D-N.Y.)
• Rep. Betty Sutton (D-Ohio)
• Rep. Peter DeFazio (D-Ore.)
• Rep. Mike Doyle (D-Pa.)
• Rep. Mike Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.)
• Rep. Jim Langevin (D-R.I.)
• Rep. Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.)
• Rep. Jim Moran (D-Va.)
• Rep. Jay Inslee (D-Wash.)
• Rep. Dave Reichert (R-Wash.)

I hope you will use the Humane Scorecard as a guide, and communicate with your lawmakers about their grades for 2011. If they scored high marks, please thank them for their support of animal protection. If they did poorly, please tell them you’re watching and you hope they’ll do better in 2012. Let all your federal legislators know that you and other constituents care about the humane treatment of animals, and want to see common-sense policies enacted to protect these creatures from cruelty and abuse.

Where do the GOP Candidates Stand on Animal Issues?

The Humane Society Legislative Fund has not yet made any recommendation in the 2012 presidential race, but over the coming months we will be evaluating President Obama’s animal welfare record during his first term and looking at where the major Republican candidates stand on animal issues. Three of the major candidates remaining are current or ex-governors, one is a former U.S. Senator and House member, two serve in the U.S. House, and one served in the House and was Speaker of the House.

In short, each one has a record on animal welfare issues, and it’s an especially good time to examine the issues with the Iowa caucuses on Tuesday evening, and primaries in New Hampshire and South Carolina later in January. Animal advocates should factor animal issues when they evaluate the candidates and make a final decision.

Michelle Bachmann: Bachmann has generally gotten low marks on animal issues in Congress, earning an 8 percent (out of 100) on the Humane Scorecard for the 110^th Congress, a 13 percent for the 111^th Congress, and she’s on track to get 13 percent again for 2011. She has supported only a handful of animal protection bills during her congressional career, voting for measures to make animal fighting a federal felony, to ban commerce in animal crush videos, and to pair veterans with service dogs for therapy. She also supported an amendment in the House this year to limit agriculture subsidy payments to factory farms. She has, however, opposed most animal welfare measures, including modest reforms to ban the trade in dangerous primates as pets, to stop the commercial sale and slaughter of wild horses from public lands, to prohibit the import of sport-hunted polar bear trophies from Canada, and to assist conservation programs that protect rare cats and dogs, cranes, marine turtles, and sea otters. She also voted to use tax dollars to kill wildlife as a subsidy to private livestock ranchers, and to block the Environmental Protection Agency from collecting data on greenhouse gases from factory farms.

Newt Gingrich: Gingrich earned a 21 percent on the Humane Scorecard for the 103^rd Congress, but did not have scores for subsequent sessions since the Speaker of the House typically does not vote. He did vote to allow sport hunting in the Mojave National Preserve, and to allow foreign aid dollars to be used to promote trophy hunting of elephants and other species. On the positive side, he cosponsored legislation to strengthen the Endangered Species Act, and when he was Speaker helped to prevent the weakening of endangered species protections. Gingrich is, so far, the only presidential candidate who has actively talked about the importance of the human-animal bond while on the campaign trail. He launched a web site called “Pets with Newt,” and he is widely known to be a fan of zoos. Gingrich wrote the foreword to the guidebook “America’s Best Zoos,” and often stops by to visit the local zoo when he’s in a new city.

Jon Huntsman: During his time as governor of Utah from 2005 to 2009, Huntsman signed a number of animal protection bills into law, including measures to create a dog and cat spay and neuter fund, to allow out-of-state veterinarians to assist during emergencies, and to ban the remote-controlled shooting of live animals over the Internet. He did more than sign bills, and actively used his leadership position to move an important policy toward enactment: At a time when Utah was one of a handful of states that did not have felony-level penalties for animal cruelty, Huntsman called a special session of the legislature in 2007 to address, among other issues, a felony animal cruelty bill known as Henry’s Law, named after a tortured dog. His spokeswoman said the governor supported the bill and that “Gov. Huntsman believes this legislation is very important and a progressive step in the right direction in how we can all better treat animals.” When he signed a bill in 2008 creating a first-offense felony penalty for abusing dogs or cats, he praised the animal advocates for their persistence in advocating for the new law, and stated, “As we treat our animals, so do we treat our fellow human beings. There is a connection there that I think is undeniable.”

Ron Paul: Like Bachmann, Ron Paul has consistently received low marks on animal issues in Congress: He earned a 10 percent on the Humane Scorecard for the 108^th Congress, a 14 percent in the 109^th Congress, a zero in the 110^th Congress, a 7 percent in the 111^th Congress, and he’s on track to get a 25 percent for 2011. He has voted to allow the slaughter of American horses for food exports, the killing of Yellowstone National Park bison, the trophy shooting of bears over piles of bait on federal lands, the commercial sale and slaughter of wild horses from public lands, the import of sport-hunted polar bear trophies, and the slaughter of downer livestock too sick or injured to walk on their own. He voted to block EPA from collecting data on factory farm emissions and voted against conservation legislation to protect rare cats and dogs, cranes, marine turtles, and sea otters. He was one of only a handful of lawmakers who opposed legislation to ban commerce in animal crush videos, to provide for pets in disaster planning, to ban the trade in dangerous primates as pets, to make dogfighting and cockfighting a felony, and to fund the enforcement of the federal animal fighting law. He has supported a handful of animal protection measures, to bar the trade in big cats as pets, to pair veterans with service dogs, and to cut funding for several government programs that harm animals, such as agriculture subsidies, lethal predator control, trapping on national wildlife refuges, and trophy hunting programs in foreign countries. 

Rick Perry: During his time as governor of Texas over the last decade, Perry has amassed a very strong record on animal protection, signing a number of animal protection bills into law, including measures to strengthen the animal cruelty and animal fighting laws multiple times, to regulate the private ownership of dangerous captive wildlife, to require the inclusion of animals in disaster plans, to protect bats, to allow the establishment of pet trusts, and to restrict the tethering of dogs, among others. The most recent legislative session was a banner year for animal protection lawmaking in Texas, and Perry signed bills in 2011 to regulate large-scale commercial dog and cat breeders, to ban attendance at cockfights and possession of cockfighting weapons, to require people convicted of cruelty to reimburse shelters for the costs of holding animals, and to allow pets and companion animals to be included in protective orders. The cockfighting industry and large-scale dog breeders urged him to veto these bills, and he tossed aside their concerns. He did veto a bill that would have allowed counties with populations greater than 450,000 to adopt ordinances regulating the roadside sale of animals. Perry famously paused while on a morning jog last year to shoot a coyote, and the state recently authorized the shooting of feral hogs from helicopters as well as the shooting of feral burros in Big Bend State Park. His staff members, however, are working with HSUS staff on the burro issue, and they have indicated that they are open to non-lethal approaches.

Mitt Romney: Romney attracted the ire of animal advocates when they learned that during a 1983 vacation, he put the family’s Irish setter, Seamus, in a carrier and strapped him to the roof rack of the station wagon. When the terrified dog urinated and defecated during the 12-hour drive, Romney pulled over, hosed down the dog, and continued the voyage from Boston to Ontario. As chief executive of the 2002 Winter Olympics in Salt Lake City, Romney also came under fire from animal protection groups for allowing a rodeo exhibition that included calf roping. His term as Massachusetts governor from 2003 to 2007 was mixed, and Romney did not distinguish himself on animal issues. He appointed a raft of animal-unfriendly people to the state Fisheries and Wildlife Board, even though Massachusetts voters overwhelmingly passed a ballot measure calling for more balanced wildlife policy. He vetoed a bill that would have given students the right to choose alternatives to animal dissection in the classroom. He did, however, sign a number of animal protection bills into law, including measures to strengthen the animal cruelty and animal fighting laws and prevent a convicted animal abuser from getting the animal back. 

Rick Santorum: Of all the candidates who have served in Congress, Santorum was arguably the most active on animal protection issues. He earned a 60 percent on the Humane Scorecard for the 108^th Congress, and an 80 percent for the 109^th Congress. But more importantly, he was the lead sponsor of the Pet Animal Welfare Statute (PAWS) to crack down on large-scale commercial puppy mills, and held a hearing on the bill when he was the chairman of the Senate Agriculture Committee’s Subcommittee on Research, Nutrition and General Legislation. He was also a leader in the Senate urging adequate funding for the enforcement of the Animal Welfare Act, Humane Methods of Slaughter Act, the federal animal fighting law, and other animal welfare programs. He cosponsored legislation to establish federal felony penalties for dogfighting and cockfighting, cosponsored legislation to require the addition of a bittering agent to antifreeze and engine coolant to prevent the poisoning of pets, and voted to stop the slaughter of American horses for food exports.

It’s clear that Santorum, Perry, and Huntsman have the strongest animal protection records. They showed leadership and active support for our issues, and HSLF commends them for their past performance. Bachmann and Paul have demonstrated a consistent hostility or indifference to these concerns. Romney has largely been indifferent and has not been an active supporter. Gingrich has been a bit enigmatic, but he understands the power of the human-animal bond and has taken action to protect some of the most charismatic species.

The 2011 Congressional Year in Review for Animals

As the first year of the 112^th Congress draws to a close, the Humane Society Legislative Fund takes stock of how animal protection fared in 2011. Despite congressional gridlock, budget standoffs, and deepening partisan divides, we were able to win some important victories for animals, set the stage for further progress in 2012, and demonstrate again that animal welfare is a core American value. We will soon publish our final 2011 Humane Scorecard, which rates members of Congress on their individual performance, but today I will provide a round-up of the year’s achievements, setbacks, and work that lies ahead.

Achievements

It was undoubtedly a very tough budget climate to seek funding increases, with many lawmakers focused on deficit reduction this year. Nevertheless, thanks to a concerted lobbying push by The HSUS and HSLF and our supporters, Congress approved some record-level boosts for key animal welfare programs in fiscal year 2012:

• Almost a 20 percent jump (more than $5 million increase) in the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s annual budget to strengthen inspections and enforcement of the Animal Welfare Act at about 12,000 sites, including puppy mills, laboratories, zoos, circuses, and other facilities. This is on top of $4 million in reprogrammed FY 2011 funds approved in October by Agriculture Appropriations leaders—Reps. Jack Kingston, R-Ga., and Sam Farr, D-Calif., and Sens. Herb Kohl, D-Wis., and Roy Blunt, R-Mo.—specifically to improve oversight at puppy mills. A bipartisan group of 125 representatives and 34 senators—led by Reps. Earl Blumenauer, D-Ore., and Chris Smith, R-N.J., and Sens. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., and David Vitter, R-La.—joined in seeking the FY 2012 boost for the Animal Welfare Act, along with funding for other key animal welfare programs. 
• A nearly 40 percent jump ($196,000 increase) for USDA’s enforcement of the Horse Protection Act, which had been stuck at the woefully inadequate ceiling of $500,000 since 1976. These funds will help USDA crack down on the cruel and illegal practice of “soring” show horses, the intentional use of caustic chemicals and sharp objects on horses’ hooves and legs to make it painful for them to step down and give them an artificial, high-stepping gait in show competitions—in other words, deliberate infliction of severe pain in order to cheat and win prizes. Sen. Mary Landrieu, D-La., and Reps. Phil Roe, R-Tenn., Ed Whitfield, R-Ky., and Steve Cohen, D-Tenn., championed this funding request.
• A 17 percent jump ($2.32 million increase) for USDA’s Investigative and Enforcement Services, which does follow-up work on a range of cases including those under the Animal Welfare Act and the Horse Protection Act. All of the FY 2012 increase is dedicated for animal welfare activities.
• Maintaining $4.8 million (same as last year) for the veterinary student loan forgiveness program that helps ease the shortage of veterinarians practicing in rural areas and in government positions (such as those overseeing humane slaughter and Animal Welfare Act rules), by forgiving student debt for those who choose to practice in one of those underserved areas.
• At least $20 million to help ensure implementation of labor and environmental provisions—including for wildlife protection programs—under free trade agreements with countries of Central America, Peru, and the Dominican Republic. 
• Thanks to the work of the Center for Biological Diversity and others, $4 million to study and combat white-nose syndrome, a lethal disease that has had a devastating impact on millions of bats in North America.
• In addition to funding animal welfare programs, the appropriations committees also included helpful report language directing the federal agencies and expressing concern about a number of important issues: 
  • Humane Slaughter—directing USDA to ensure that funds intended to strengthen oversight of humane handling rules are being used that way.
  • Animal Fighting—expressing strong concern and urging USDA to work with relevant agencies to investigate and enforce laws against dogfighting and cockfighting.
  • Antibiotics in Animal Agriculture—urging the Food and Drug Administration to take several specific actions to move forward on addressing the overuse of antibiotics in livestock for non-therapeutic purposes, a common practice on factory farms. Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., and Rep. Louise Slaughter, D-N.Y., led efforts on this. 
  • Pet Theft for Research—directing the National Institutes of Health to expedite its phase-out of Class B dealer-acquired dogs and cats in research (such dealers obtain animals through random sources, which can include theft of family pets and fraudulent response to “free to good home” ads). Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, played the key role on this.
  • Alternatives Development—requiring the NIH to prioritize funding for transition to computational, molecular and other non-animal tests for chemical risk assessment and drug testing, and report to Congress on progress; also requiring the Environmental Protection Agency to move to computational toxicology and other non-animal testing for the Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program. Rep. Ken Calvert, R-Calif., and Sen. Harkin championed these efforts.

And there were other bright spots for animal protection in 2011:

• As part of the final funding bill for USDA, Congress agreed to prohibit agribusiness subsidy direct payments to millionaires (individuals or legal entities with an average Adjusted Gross Income in excess of $1 million). Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., offered an amendment that was approved by an overwhelming 84-15 vote and then incorporated into the House-Senate conference package. Earlier in the year, similar amendments were offered in the House by Reps. Blumenauer and Jeff Flake, R-Ariz.—those were defeated, but helped build momentum for this effort. Massive factory farms, which thrive on taxpayer giveaways that keep animal feed artificially cheap, jeopardize public health, the environment and animal welfare, while also driving smaller and more humane, sustainable family farms out of business. We hope Congress will enact further reforms to end wasteful handouts that support factory farms.
• An anti-wildlife rider in the committee bill funding the Interior Department was removed, thanks to an amendment offered on the floor by Reps. Norm Dicks, D-Wash., Mike Thompson, D-Calif., Mike Fitzpatrick, R-Pa., and Colleen Hanabusa, D-Hawaii, which was approved by a vote of 224-202 in July. The “extinction rider” would have prevented the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service from implementing some of the most crucial sections of the Endangered Species Act, such as protecting any new species and designating critical habitat for currently listed species.
• The final funding bill for the Interior Department contained a good provision barring the Bureau of Land Management from killing healthy, unadopted wild horses and burros or selling them for slaughter, as in past years.
• The Senate’s Defense Department authorization bill would have inadvertently eliminated a prohibition in the Uniform Code of Military Justice against acts of bestiality by service members, as the Senate dealt with the repeal of the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy. After we contacted the key members of the House-Senate conference committee, the conferees restored the ban on bestiality.
• The Army agreed to halt testing on monkeys of nerve agents meant to simulate a nerve gas attack, as urged by Rep. Roscoe Bartlett, R-Md.

Setbacks

Congress unfortunately took some adverse actions for animals this year, including the failure to renew language that has been in each of the annual funding bills for USDA since 2005 regarding horse slaughter. This “defund” language barred the agency from conducting inspections at or approving meat from horse slaughter plants. The language was incorporated into the House Agriculture Appropriations bill in May, thanks to a successful amendment offered in committee by Rep. Jim Moran, D-Va., but it was dropped in the final House-Senate conference negotiations in November. Americans don’t eat horses, and they don’t want them inhumanely killed, shrink-wrapped, and sent to Belgium or Japan for a high-priced appetizer. Nor do they want taxpayers to have to subsidize such a cruel industry. The omission of the defunding provision makes even more urgent our push to enact S. 1176 / H.R. 2966, the American Horse Slaughter Prevention Act (led by Sens. Landrieu and Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., and Reps. Dan Burton, R-Ind., and Jan Schakowsky, D-Ill.) to prohibit the transport—within the U.S., as well as export to Mexico and Canada—of horses for slaughter for human consumption. The House bill currently has 153 cosponsors, and the Senate bill 27 cosponsors.

In another step backwards, Rep. Mike Simpson, R-Idaho, and Sen. Jon Tester, D-Mont., led the charge against wolves by making an end run around the Endangered Species Act on the “continuing resolution” enacted in April to fund the federal government through FY 2011. Putting politics before science, they removed ESA protections for gray wolves in the Northern Rockies. This delisting of a species by congressional fiat opened the door for reckless sport hunting and trapping of wolves in large numbers in Idaho, Montana, and Wyoming, and sets a dangerous precedent for future politically motivated attacks on the ESA.

The House also defeated an amendment offered by Reps. John Campbell, R-Calif., Peter DeFazio, D-Ore., and Gary Peters, D-Mich., to cut $11 million in lethal predator control as a subsidy for private livestock ranchers. USDA’s Wildlife Services program routinely uses tax dollars to poison wildlife, shoot them from helicopters, and use other costly, cruel and indiscriminate methods that also kill pets and endangered species—and that don’t work effectively, since other predators move into the vacant territory. According to USDA, less than 1 percent of livestock are killed by predators. Non-lethal, cost-effective and humane control methods are available, yet the federal government continues to waste millions of tax dollars on inhumane killing methods.

Key Issues Ahead

We are halfway through a two-year congressional session, and there are a number of other animal protection issues which are still making their way through the process. We built critical momentum in 2011 on key issues like animal fighting, puppy mills, horse slaughter, and chimps in research, and all of those bills have large numbers of bipartisan cosponsors going into 2012. Here are some of the key issues that lie ahead:

Pets and Cruelty

• Veterans Dog Training Therapy Act—To create a pilot program for training dogs, including shelter dogs, as a form of therapy to help treat combat veterans suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder and other post-deployment mental health conditions, and then have the animals become service dogs for veterans with disabilities. H.R. 198 introduced by Rep. Michael Grimm, R-N.Y. / S. 1838 introduced by Sens. Max Baucus, D-Mont., and John Boozman, R-Ark. The House unanimously approved H.R. 198 as part of a package (H.R. 2074) of veterans’ health care bills, and it’s now pending in the Senate. 
• Puppy Uniform Protection and Safety (PUPS) Act—To close a loophole in the Animal Welfare Act by requiring that large commercial breeders who sell 50 or more puppies per year directly to consumers via the Internet or other means be licensed and inspected; and to require that dogs used for breeding at commercial breeding facilities be provided the opportunity to exercise daily. H.R. 835 introduced by Reps. Jim Gerlach, R-Pa., Farr, Bill Young, R-Fla., and Lois Capps, D-Calif. / S. 707 introduced by Sens. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., and Vitter. The House bill currently has 192 cosponsors, and the Senate bill 32. Sens. Durbin and Vitter also sent a letter encouraging USDA to issue a regulation covering breeders selling directly to the public.  
• Animal Fighting Spectator Prohibition Act—To establish misdemeanor penalties for knowingly attending an organized animal fight and felony penalties for bringing a minor to such a fight. H.R. 2492 introduced by Reps. Tom Marino, R-Pa., and Betty Sutton, D-Ohio / S. 1947 introduced by Sens. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., Mark Kirk, R-Ill., Maria Cantwell, D-Wash., and Scott Brown, R-Mass. The House bill currently has 179 cosponsors, and the Senate bill was just introduced.

Equine Issues

• Horse Transportation Safety Act—To prohibit the use of double-decker vehicles to transport horses in interstate commerce. S. 1281 introduced by Sens. Kirk and Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J.
• Interstate Horseracing Improvement Act—To prohibit the use of performance-enhancing drugs in horseracing, which jeopardizes the health and safety of both horses and jockeys, creates an unfair playing field, and corrupts the integrity of the sport. H.R. 1733 introduced by Rep. Whitfield / S. 886 introduced by Sen. Tom Udall, D-N.M.

Animals in Research

• Great Ape Protection and Cost Savings Act—To phase out the use of chimpanzees in invasive research, retire all (approximately 500) federally-owned chimpanzees to sanctuary, and prohibit the breeding of chimpanzees for invasive research. H.R. 1513 introduced by Reps. Bartlett, Steve Israel, D-N.Y., Dave Reichert, R-Wash., Jim Langevin, D-R.I., and Ed Towns, D-N.Y. / S. 810 introduced by Sens. Cantwell, Susan Collins, R-Maine, and Bernard Sanders, I-Vt. Adopting these reforms for chimpanzees would save taxpayers $300 million over the next decade. The National Academies’ Institute of Medicine issued a report in December concluding that chimpanzees are largely unnecessary for research, and alternatives are readily available. Sens. Harkin, Tom Udall, and Jeff Bingaman, D-N.M., had requested the IOM study. The House bill currently has 152 cosponsors, and the Senate bill 13 cosponsors.
• Animal Testing—As Congress looks for ways to reduce the federal deficit, we are pushing to replace outdated, costly, and time consuming animal tests that the National Toxicology Program still relies on, though they often yield unusable results, with much more efficient molecular, cellular and computational tests. For one-fifth the cost of a multi-year NTP carcinogenicity study, the NIH Chemical Genomics Center reports that it is able to screen up to 1,000 chemicals in 200 different robot-automated cell or gene tests in as little as two weeks. Shifting away from conventional animal testing to better test methods would save at least $500 million over the next decade.
• Battlefield Excellence through Superior Training (BEST) Practices Act—To require the Secretary of Defense to use only human-based training methods for training members of the Armed Forces in the treatment of combat trauma injuries, and prohibit the use of animals in such training. H.R. 1417 introduced by Rep. Bob Filner, D-Calif.

Farm Animals

• Egg Products Inspection Act Amendments—To phase out barren battery cages for all 280 million laying hens in the United States, provide them with nearly twice as much space, mandate labels on egg cartons to inform consumers about how the eggs were produced, and make other needed reforms jointly agreed upon by The Humane Society of the United States and the United Egg Producers, which represents 87 percent of the egg industry in this country. This legislation will establish a uniform, mandatory national standard that ensures a level playing field for all producers and certainty about what will be required in the coming years, so they can make the necessary investments in their businesses. Reps. Kurt Schrader, D-Ore., Elton Gallegly, R-Calif., and others plan to introduce this bill early in 2012.
• Preservation of Antibiotics for Medical Treatment Act—To phase out the routine non-therapeutic use of antibiotics in farm animals—a common practice to promote growth and compensate for overcrowded, stressful, unsanitary conditions on factory farms—in order to maintain the effectiveness of antibiotics for treating sick people and animals. H.R. 965 introduced by Rep. Slaughter / S. 1211 introduced by Sens. Feinstein and Collins.
• Downed Animal and Food Safety Protection Act—To codify the USDA ban on the slaughter of downed cattle and strengthen it to cover other species, as well as downed calves, and ensure immediate humane euthanasia and application to livestock auctions and markets. H.R. 3704 introduced by Reps. Gary Ackerman, D-N.Y., and Peter King, R-N.Y.

Wildlife

• Wild Horses—The House approved a $2 million cut in Bureau of Land Management funding for wild horse and burro management, offered as an amendment to H.R. 1 (a continuing resolution to fund the government through FY 2011) by Rep. Burton. The purpose of the cut was to call attention to serious problems in the BLM’s current management program of round-ups and long-term holding in federally-financed pens, and the availability of a more fiscally-responsible alternative approach involving humane fertility control (immunocontraception) on the range. While H.R. 1 was ultimately defeated in the Senate, the House action helped spur BLM—a week after the Burton amendment’s approval—to announce its intention to overhaul its wild horse and burro management and modestly increase plans for using immunocontraception. Rep. Raúl Grijalva, D-Ariz., led a group letter (co-signed by 64 other representatives) to the Department of Interior opposing a planned round-up to spay and geld wild horses; the letter noted that immunocontraception is more humane, and BLM subsequently cancelled its spay/geld plan, instead using immunocontraception. We will continue pushing to overhaul the BLM’s current system with a more humane, effective program that could save taxpayers $180 million over ten years.
• Large Constrictor Snakes—The Obama administration has been delaying action on a long-awaited rule that would list nine invasive species of dangerous giant snakes, including pythons, boa constrictors, and anacondas, as “injurious” under the Lacey Act, which would ban their import into the U.S. or transportation between states. These snakes, sold for the pet trade, jeopardize public safety, animal welfare, and fragile ecosystems. Sens. Bill Nelson, D-Fla., and Ben Cardin, D-Md., and Reps. Tom Rooney, R-Fla., Bill Young, Dicks, Gregorio Sablan, D-Northern Mariana Islands, Ed Markey, D-Mass., and Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, R-Fla., mobilized letters urging the White House to finalize the rule, and were joined by 17 other representatives. In addition to the regulatory effort, Rep. Rooney introduced H.R. 511. If the Obama administration issues a weakened rule, or fails to address all nine species of snakes, we will continue to work in Congress for a comprehensive policy.
• Captive Primate Safety Act—To prohibit interstate and foreign commerce in primates for the pet trade. S. 1324 introduced by Sens. Boxer, Vitter, and Blumenthal. The release of dozens of exotic animals including primates from a private farm in Ohio—which led to panic in the community and nearly all the animals being shot to death—highlighted the urgency for this legislation, reminding the nation about the out-of-control exotic pet industry that puts animals and people at risk every day.
• Wildlife Conservation—Several bills to reauthorize programs that protect wildlife are advancing. House subcommittee hearings have been held on H.R. 1761, introduced by Rep. Pedro Pierluisi, D-Puerto Rico, to extend a grant program for marine turtle conservation; on H.R. 1760, introduced by Rep. George Miller, D-Calif., to do the same for great ape populations and their habitats; and on H.R. 50, introduced by Rep. Don Young, R-Alaska, to reauthorize the Multinational Species Conservation Funds for the protection of the African and Asian elephant, rhinoceros, and tiger. S. 538, introduced by Sen. Cardin to extend the grant program for neotropical migratory bird conservation, was approved in committee and placed on the Senate calendar (the House companion bill is H.R. 1456, introduced by Rep. Ron Kind, D-Wis.).
• Sportsmanship in Hunting Act—To prohibit the interstate transport of exotic mammals for the purpose of "canned hunts" (the killing of animals for trophies or entertainment in fenced areas smaller than 1,000 acres); and to ban remote-controlled hunting offered via the Internet. H.R. 2210 introduced by Reps. Cohen and Brad Sherman, D-Calif.
• Anti-Wildlife Bills—The House Natural Resources Committee chaired by Rep. Doc Hastings, R-Wash., has passed several harmful pieces of legislation, including H.R. 3069, to allow the killing of sea lions in the Columbia River basin because they eat a tiny fraction of the fish there (notwithstanding the much larger take from commercial fishing, invasive species, and habitat destruction), regardless of whether the fish are listed under the ESA; H.R. 991, a bailout for 41 big game hunters who want to import polar bear trophies into this country from Canada; and H.R. 2834, which would prioritize sport hunting on federal lands, at the expense of other land users. But opponents on the committee, such as Reps. Markey, Grijalva, John Garamendi, D-Calif., and Madeleine Bordallo, D-Guam, challenged these harmful bills and laid important groundwork to stop them in the full House and in the Senate from becoming law.

In sum, the 112^th Congress is a work-in-progress. While we made some critical breakthroughs for animals, particularly on the funding front, we also suffered some setbacks. Many critically important animal welfare bills are poised for action in the second session, and congressional support is also putting pressure on the federal agencies to take action for animal protection. We hope you’ll join us as we work harder than ever to advance an animal protection agenda in Congress in 2012.