Michael Markarian: Animals & Politics

There Oughta Be a Law: Q&A with Cheryl Woodcock

I hosted a nationwide conference call with thousands of animal advocates this weekend to announce the winner of the Humane Society Legislative Fund’s first-ever “There Oughta Be a Law” contest. Animal rescuer Cheryl Woodcock of Baldwin, N.D., joined the call, and I gave her the news that her proposal was selected by our panel of judges—Reps. John Campbell (R-Calif.) and Jim Moran (D-Va.) and myself—out of more than 3,500 other entries from all 50 states.

The winner of HSLF’s 2009 “There Oughta Be a Law” contest,
Cheryl Woodcock, with her four foster kittens who were
found in a Dumpster.

Cheryl’s winning idea: a tax credit for spaying and neutering pets. It’s a timely and innovative proposal that incentivizes personal responsibility and encourages pet owners to do their part to help reduce pet overpopulation. “Cheryl’s Law” could become part of the solution toward ending the euthanasia of three million healthy and treatable dogs and cats each year in America’s animal shelters, and reducing the financial burden of animal care and control on local communities.

HSLF will bring Cheryl to Washington, D.C. to lobby for her bill. I had a chance to visit with her and want to share with blog readers a bit about her work and her winning entry.

Michael Markarian: Tell us about yourself and your animals.

Cheryl Woodcock: I am married with six kids. We live on 80 acres. We raise sheep, and Chesapeake Bay retrievers. We have three Scottie dogs, many farm cats, and a sheep herding dog, all of whom are spayed or neutered. Many of our cats and our sheep herding dog are rescues from the city pound. We have even rescued a few house birds. We also have horses, chickens, and calves. Currently, I work for two vet clinics and make homemade dog treats that I sell at some pet stores and at craft shows. Animals are my passion.

MM: What’s it like being an animal advocate and rescuer in rural North Dakota?

CW: Baldwin is a town of 736 people—a mostly rural population—although we have 18 families who live right in the town of Baldwin. We have a post office and a GREAT school. The school has grades K-8 with 15 students, two teachers, and a teacher’s aide. We fight a battle with the state legislature every two years—they try to close small rural schools and we fight to keep our schools open.

A few years ago, I was asked to help our local pound by raising an orphaned kitten. He needed to be bottle-fed. I took him home and he has been with me since. Right now, I have four kittens who were about two days old when they were tossed in a Dumpster at a gas station. A worker at the gas station found them and called the police. The police took them to the pound and I got a call from one of the animal wardens. I stopped at a store, bought formula and a bottle, and went to see my new friends. They were very frail and very, very cold. I really didn’t expect to see them all make it through the night. I had to feed them every two hours, day and night, for the first few weeks. My female Scottie dog, Maggie, helped care for them, by cleaning them for me. Luckily I was able to take them to work with me—I work for two vet clinics. They are growing and they just FINALLY started eating on their own. I will be looking for good homes for them in a week or so.

I am the person in the neighborhood who gets a call and takes the sickly animals from neighbors. I have gotten two sickly lambs and a calf and they have survived—for me. I love the challenge and the satisfaction of caring for them and watching them grow and flourish. I have even had baby lambs in my house when they were sick and too young to be outside. One lamb even walked around my house in a doggie diaper. I try to find homes for as many cats and dogs as I can. The city pound has a volunteer who is great at finding homes or rescue groups for the dogs who need homes. I am all about animals. I love animals.

MM: You have a pet treat business as well?

CW: Yes, the name is Farmer Tillie’s Homemade Dog Treats. I wanted to make quality wholesome dog treats for my Scottie dogs. I sell them in a few pet stores and at some craft shows. My dogs totally enjoy it when I make treats. They get to sample them. I have many satisfied returning customers.

MM: How did you hear about HSLF’s “There Oughta Be a Law” contest, and what made you enter?

CW: I was on Facebook one night, when I was up feeding kittens, and saw the ad for the contest. I thought I should enter. I was mad at what the abandoned kittens had to go through. I decided to enter because of the kittens and all the animals I see at the pound who look so lost and need homes. I hate it when animals have to be put down when there are no homes for them. It’s a better solution than them starving or freezing to death, but if there was an incentive for people to get their animals spayed or neutered, maybe this issue could become a thing of the past.

MM: Why is spaying and neutering dogs and cats so important to you, and how can a tax credit help?

CW: The reason I am so passionate about this issue is because of the tiny baby kittens I have taken care of. There are always abandoned animals at the city pound. Those who don’t get adopted or rescued get put to sleep. I hate seeing that as much as I hate seeing abandoned baby animals. I think if there was a tax credit for people to spay or neuter their animals, more of them would get spayed or neutered and there wouldn’t be so many abandoned animals. I think, in this day and age, with everyone looking for a way to save money, a tax credit would really make them think about it.

MM: Are you looking forward to your trip to Washington?

CW: I am TOTALLY excited about winning a trip to Washington, D.C. I have never been to that part of the U.S. I think it will be great to be able to see the White House, the Lincoln Memorial, and the Vietnam Memorial Wall. It’s all so much a part of our history.

MM: Who are your federal legislators in Congress?

CW: Senators Kent Conrad and Byron Dorgan, and Representative Earl Pomeroy. I would love to work with them in getting a bill passed!

A Game-Changer for Shelter Pets

There’s no question that we as a society need to do more to help homeless dogs and cats find loving families, and we are even seeing the issue of pet adoption enter the public policy arena. In California, for example, Assemblyman Cameron Smyth (R-Santa Clarita) introduced a bill to allow a tax deduction for adopting an animal from a shelter, and Assemblyman Ted Lieu (D-Torrance) offered a resolution declaring September 2009 as “Adopt a Shelter Pet Month.”

But today we are celebrating the greatest investment of resources the animal protection movement has ever made to end the euthanasia of millions of healthy and treatable dogs and cats. The Ad Council, The Humane Society of the United States, and Maddie’s Fund have launched The Shelter Pet Project, a national public service advertising campaign urging pet lovers to make shelter adoption their first choice. You can read about the pathbreaking campaign for pets on Wayne Pacelle’s blog, and watch the first two TV ads—“Ditched” and “White Collar”—here.

Animal All-Star

I met 14-year-old San Diego student Ben Byrom last year, when he was volunteering for the campaign to pass Proposition 2 and ban inhumane factory farming practices. Ben was too young to circulate petitions himself  because he wasn’t a registered voter, but he helped his parents gather signatures to put Prop 2 on the ballot, mailed volunteer packets, worked booths at events, and eloquently made his case to voters. He’s an articulate and well-informed advocate, and he also educated his classmates and teachers during class.

Fourteen-year-old Ben Byrom is an effective advocate
for animals in California.

Ben lives his beliefs each day, and continues to make a difference in his community. He has volunteered for groups like Animal Acres and the Animal Protection and Rescue League, and he has contacted local politicians to help the seal pups and their mothers of Children's Pool Beach in La Jolla, Calif. For his leadership and work on a wide range of animal protection issues, he was named the “2009 Humane Teen of the Year” by Humane Society Youth.

Ben is taking another step to continue his advocacy for animals today in California. He is sending a letter to Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, urging him to sign two important animal protection bills on his desk—A.B. 241 to curb abuses at puppy mills by limiting to 50 the number of adult breeding dogs or cats confined in large-scale commercial operations, and S.B. 135 to ban the painful and unnecessary tail docking of dairy cows. Ben is dropping his letter in the mail at a downtown post office, with reporters in tow so that he can generate public awareness and spread the word to other Californians.

One of the long-term benefits of a statewide campaign like Prop 2 is not only that it results in a tangible public policy reform for millions of animals, but also that it rallies animal advocates around political change and that same group of dedicated people can continue to organize for other animal protection issues. The statewide network of advocates who helped Prop 2 sail to victory last year remained in place and helped to pass a number of animal protection bills this year in the California legislature—on puppy mills, dogfighting, factory farming, wildlife poaching, and other subjects.

And when young people like Ben get involved, they continue to have an impact for animals in the years to come. I’ve pasted Ben’s letter to the governor below, and I congratulate him on his effective advocacy for animals.

Dear Governor Schwarzenegger,

My name is Ben Byrom. I am 14 years old, and I am a volunteer for many animal protection causes in San Diego where I live. I volunteer for the Animal Protection and Rescue League and worked on the Yes on Prop 2 campaign to ensure that farm animals in California are able to turn around and extend their limbs. I also help protect the seals in La Jolla and recently won the Humane Teen of the Year award from the Humane Society of the United States.

As my Governor, you have the ability right now to help a lot of animals by signing A.B. 241 and S.B. 135. 

S.B. 135 would ban tail docking of dairy cows, which is the very cruel and inhumane practice of cutting off a cow's tail for really no reason at all. I don’t understand why anyone would want to cut a cow’s tail off, but they shouldn’t be allowed to do it. Not only does it hurt a lot to have part of your body cut off without any painkiller, but these cows need their tails to prevent attacks from biting flies. It’s just wrong to take their tails away from them.

A.B. 241 would crack down on puppy mills by limiting the number of breeding dogs or cats people can own.  In these puppy mills, lots of dogs are kept for their whole lives in really bad conditions and they never get to be part of a family. I have read that you’re a dog lover like me, and so I know you wouldn’t want lots of dogs suffering in California. You can help them by signing this bill.

Neither of these bills will cost the state any money.

On behalf of other kids like me that care about how animals are treated in California, please sign both of these important bills.

Thank you.

Sincerely,

Ben Byrom

Send Us Your Bill

How many times have you heard about a cruel or abusive practice involving animals, and wondered, “How can that be legal? Isn’t there a law against that?”

Now, the Humane Society Legislative Fund has an opportunity for you to take your idea and help shape future public policy reforms for animals. HSLF has launched its first-ever “There Oughta Be a Law” contest, and we're asking animal lovers like you to submit your concept for a federal animal protection bill.

Every good law starts as an idea, and people who care about animals know first-hand the problems and challenges they face. Many lawmakers run similar contests each year and some great new laws have bubbled up through that process.

Some of the most significant animal protection laws, too, have been the result of compelling personal stories. In 1966, after America learned the fate of a female Dalmatian named Pepper who was stolen from a farm in Pennsylvania and sold to a research facility in the Bronx, Congress passed the federal Laboratory Animal Welfare Act. And in 2008, 11-year-old Haley Ham led the charge to pass “Haley's Law” in Tennessee, requiring the addition of a bittering agent to antifreeze and engine coolant, after her own beloved dogs, Jessie and Sam, were killed by the sweet-tasting liquid.

As a citizen, you have the power to influence your elected officials, and you can participate by submitting your idea—it could become the next federal bill to help animals around the country. We've already received more than 1,200 entries, demonstrating a surge of interest in lawmaking to protect animals, and I hope you'll add yours to the mix.

The winning entry will be selected by a panel of judges including legislators and lobbyists, and will be announced at our next Party Animals event on October 25th. The winner will receive an exciting two-day trip to the nation’s capital that will include a meeting with me and the rest of the HSLF staff to discuss his or her proposed bill, a visit to Capitol Hill to lobby federal lawmakers and congressional staff with us, a special feature in an upcoming edition of our bimonthly newsletter “Humane Activist,” and an opportunity to see the sights of Washington, D.C.

And if you haven’t participated in Party Animals before, it’s another great way to get involved, bringing people together on one night at the same time for a party with a purpose. Using tools provided by HSLF, party hosts create their own website, establish a fundraising goal, send invitations to friends and family, and collect donations through a secure online server. It’s fun and easy and it brings people together to stand up for animals. To join the fun, let us know if you’re interested in hosting a Party Animals house party.

The core principle of democracy is a belief in the wisdom of the people. I can’t wait to see the ideas that your wisdom will bring, and I look forward to the new animal protection policies that will be generated by animal advocates around the country. The contest ends at midnight on October 5th—submit your idea today!

11 Habits of Highly Effective Lobbyists

Congressional town hall meetings are erupting in violence over the health care issue. A lobbying firm for the coal industry forged letters supposedly from local groups unhappy with climate change legislation. It seems that grassroots lobbying is getting a bad rap these days.

August is a great time to meet with your federal legislators
to urge support for animal protection bills.

But that shouldn’t discourage animal advocates from being in touch with their members of Congress, especially as lawmakers have just recessed for the summer and are now back home for the district work period. Some special interests might resort to loud confrontations and phony “Astroturf” lobbying, but the animal protection cause has real stories to tell and real people who care about the issue.

When it comes to grassroots advocacy, it’s a question of quality, not quantity. My friend Stephanie Vance wrote on her blog “that just one high quality, thoughtful communication will have more of an impact on a legislator than 10 or 20 or 100 lukewarm communications—no matter whose name is on the letterhead.”

I’ve previously provided some tips for citizen lobbying and urged advocates not to forget about district office meetings. Now that August recess is here, I hope you’ll take the opportunity to visit your members of Congress and their staff at home in your community, and talk to them about why animal protection legislation is important to you.

I’m going to reprint a few tips that you can keep handy, whether you’re making a phone call or visiting them in person to make your case. Because one individual telling a personal story about an important issue is much more effective than all the town hall mobs and Astroturf groups out there.

Identify yourself. Whether you’re calling to register your opinion, or visiting a legislative office in person, start by telling them who you are. Make sure to tell them where you live so they know you’re a constituent. (Typically, you only contact your own legislators, unless it’s a special circumstance such as a committee chairman.) And let them know if you are a member of an organization or have a tie to some other stakeholder—such as HSUS, teachers, sheriffs, or veterinarians.

Be polite and professional.This is common sense, but always worth repeating. You can state your views firmly and forcefully without being hostile or argumentative. Always be friendly and courteous, even if the legislator disagrees with your position. Don’t interrupt or scream out at legislative hearings. And while it’s important to be professional, it’s also important to look professional—legislators and their staff are more likely to be persuaded by people in business attire or some other natty dressware than people wearing cut-off jeans and flip-flops.

State a clear and concise objective. Stay focused on the purpose of your phone call or meeting, and don’t wander off in too many directions. Let them know up front what you are asking them to do, and refer to bills by their numbers and names—such as, “I want Representative Smith to co-sponsor H.R. 503, the Prevention of Equine Cruelty Act.” Be sure to explain any jargon that might be unclear, such as “puppy mills,” “canned hunts,” “pound seizure,” or “Class B dealers.” It’s okay to bring up more than one bill in a meeting, but you may want to limit your list to two or three bills that are most important to you.

Explain why this issue is important to you personally. Lawmakers are interested in data and statistics, but they’re much more interested in how an issue affects their constituents personally. If you have a story to tell, it’s much more compelling than charts and graphs. If you’re talking about dogfighting, you might be an animal control or animal shelter worker who has seen injured pit bulls, or a police officer who has seen the connection that dogfighters have to drugs and violence in your community. If you’re advocating for antifreeze legislation, it might be because you had a dog who was poisoned by drinking the sweet-tasting liquid. If you’re a teacher or parent, you might comment on the impact animal cruelty has on children. Tell your story.

Don’t use form letters.Legislators want to know what you have to say, not just that you can cut and paste. They know when it’s a form letter, period. It’s okay to use talking points and language from advocacy groups like The HSUS and HSLF when you craft your letters, but it’s best to put them into your own words.

Use the web and email effectively. Visit legislators’ official web sites before your meetings, so you can learn in advance about their background, biographical information, positions on issues, and even their pets. If you send email through advocacy web sites such as humanesociety.org and hslf.org, remember to edit that part of the letter that allows you to put it into your own words. You can also send email and register comments through the legislator’s own web site. Phone calls are usually taken more seriously by legislative offices, so if you do send email, you can still follow up with a phone call, too.

Never lie or mislead. The truth for animals is harsh enough, and you don’t need to embellish. If you make up facts and figures or stretch the truth, it will always come back to haunt you. Don’t be afraid to say you don’t know the answer to a question, and offer to look it up for them later or put them in touch with someone who might know. You’re not expected to be an expert on every issue—you are a citizen who cares and has an opinion.

Work with legislative staff. Don’t be offended if you can’t get the legislator on the phone or get a meeting with him or her personally. Lawmakers rely on their staff to meet with constituents, draft legislation, learn the issues, and make policy recommendations. The staff will have more time to get to know you and your issues, and they are your gateway to the elected officials. Get to know the staff and develop relationships, so they will begin to view you as a source of reliable information on animal issues in your community.

Be prepared to compromise. Legislators may not do what you want 100 percent of the time, but they can still help advance the cause of animal protection. If you discuss three bills and they agree to support two, you’ve made progress. Don’t expect complete orthodoxy. A legislator might agree to vote for a bill when it comes to the floor, but doesn’t want to be a co-sponsor for political reasons—a vote in the hand is better than two co-sponsorships in the bush.

Listen to elected officials’ comments and questions. Don’t expect to give a monologue on animal protection. Let them react to the issues you raise, and have a conversation. Their comments and questions will give you cues on how to frame your arguments and what additional information might be useful. If they ask questions or need more information, it gives you an opportunity to follow up with them after your meeting.

Thank someone who was helpful. Always thank a staff member who took the time to meet with you, and follow up with any additional information that’s needed. And if a legislator does what you’ve requested, such as co-sponsor or vote for a bill, be sure to thank him or her for taking that action. Positive reinforcement is the most effective way to develop a good relationship for future issues.

Go Forth and Advocate: A Q&A with Stephanie Vance

Stephanie Vance's dog, Ozzie.

Stephanie Vance, the AdVocacy Guru, used to work on Capitol Hill, but now she travels the country training advocates on how to participate in the legislative process and become effective citizen lobbyists. She has published a new book, “Citizens in Action: A Guide to Lobbying and Influencing Government,” and like her presentations and training events, it’s informative, engaging, and even fun. She took a few minutes to chat with me recently about the book and her upcoming appearance at the Taking Action for Animals conference, and I wanted to share some of her thinking with blog readers.

Michael Markarian: How did you get your start in training advocates and interest groups?
Stephanie Vance: After I got my degree in political science and with my parents strongly suggesting I get a job, I moved to Washington, D.C., where I worked at a lobbying law firm, as a lobbyist for NPR, and as a legislative aide for three different members of Congress. Through those experiences, I came to realize that people really do not understand the amazing power they have to make a difference on policy issues they care about. I figured if I told them how to be more effective, they’d be happier with their government and the world would be a better place.

MM: How can the average citizen really influence government policymaking?
SV: Effective advocacy really boils down to four key steps: knowing what you want, knowing who you’re talking to, knowing how to talk to them, and knowing how to follow up. In terms of knowing what you want, it’s critical to ask for something specific as opposed to simply “educating” elected officials on an issue. They need to know how they can best help on animal welfare issues. Knowing about your audience means that (a) you should always communicate with someone relevant to you (i.e., your own elected official) and (b) you should know something about their own interests, policy interests, and background. On animal welfare issues, for example, it’s good to know if they have a companion animal in their lives; it’s also good to know what bills they’ve introduced, not just on animal issues, but across the spectrum. For the third point, knowing how to talk to them, the main point here is to tell a compelling and personal story. And finally, following up is what really separates the effective from the ineffective advocates. People who are “politely persistent” get a lot further than those who ask once and never ask again.
 
MM: Why do you think that, contrary to popular opinion, government isn’t broken?
SV: Yeah, people often do a double-take at that assertion. In my opinion government is actually designed to be completely and totally inefficient. When the founding fathers got together and said “Hey, let’s make a government,” they wanted to make it very difficult to move legislation through the process. In fact, the lack of agreement and partisan bickering isn’t evidence that government is broken—it’s evidence that government is operating exactly as the founding fathers intended.

MM: What does “Citizens in Action” offer that wasn’t covered in your previous books?
SV: It’s a much more comprehensive look at the entire advocacy process. It offers insights into the three branches and three levels of government and really seeks to help people build a comprehensive advocacy effort. In addition, there’s more information on e-advocacy, including using social networks and tools like e-mail to get your message across.

MM: You have always been a big hit at the Taking Action for Animals conference. What can people expect to hear from you if they attend this year?
SV: I am so honored and pleased to continue to be a part of this conference and will keep coming back in some capacity until people tell me not to! This year, there’s a whole lot of new things to say about effective advocacy, especially in light of the changes in the Administration and Congress. And a “special guest” and I (that’s you, Mike) will be offering up “The Worst Congressional Meeting in the World.” Everyone will get at least a chuckle out of that, I promise—as well as some ideas for how to make their interactions with legislators even more effective. Oh, and we’ll do some “Message Mad Libs.” I can’t say more—people will have to come and see it for themselves!

MM: Can you give us an example of a highly effective congressional meeting, in which an advocate or group benefited from your training tips?
SV: I’m always so pleased when someone comes up to me and says, “Hey, I tried what you said and it worked! My congressman actually listened to me.” A perfect example of this was the League of American Bicyclists lobby day, where a group of biking enthusiasts were going in to see their member of Congress absolutely sure that he, as a conservative Republican, wouldn’t support funding for bicycle safety. But they went in with a positive attitude and some personal stories about the impact of biking in the community. They were pleasantly surprised to learn the congressman was an avid bicyclist and would strongly support them.
 
MM: What was the worst congressional meeting you’ve ever witnessed?
SV: Well, we’ll see a composite of all the worst at TAFA, but I’d have to say it was when someone walked in the office and was outraged they couldn’t meet with the member himself—that instead they’d be meeting with “just staff.” That “just staff” was me and I was the Chief of Staff at the time. He actually told me that this was a big waste of his time. And then, when I told him we had nowhere to sit in the office and would he mind standing in the hall, well, he lost it. He stormed out and we never saw him again. And he never got our support on his issues.

MM: What is the absolute worst thing to say in a congressional meeting?
SV: There are so many, but probably something like, “I know your boss takes money from the other side and will never listen to me on this issue, but I thought I’d just tell you what I think anyway, even though the congressman is a corrupt politician.” Yes, people actually say those kinds of things.

MM: Do you have any specific guidance for animal advocates that sets their issues apart from other interest groups?
SV: Animal advocates have so many things going for them. They have great and compelling stories, terrific nonpartisan issues, and a strong constituency-based advocate network. The one main piece of advice I have is that advocates need to continue to build on the professionalism of the movement. As an animal advocate myself, I know that we’re sometimes seen as a little “odd” (I’m odd, but for other reasons). The more we let people know that we’re serious, we have strong arguments to make, and we know how to play the political game, the more successful we’ll be. HSUS and HSLF have really taken the lead on that and I’ve noticed a big (and positive) difference.

MM: How is Ozzie?
SV: Thank you for asking! As adorable as ever. Although, I think he finished off another TV remote last week. But we love him more than television, so he can eat all the remotes he wants. We know they’re not good for him, though, so we do our best to hide them—it’s just that as an Australian cattle dog, he’s smarter than my husband and I combined and we can’t outwit him for long.

Stephanie Vance's new book.

MM: How can people learn more and continue to sharpen their advocacy skills?
SV: Well, buy “Citizens in Action,” of course :). But I also think that all the training HSUS and HSLF give advocates is fabulous, so people should take advantage of those opportunities. In addition to the free resources available through you all, there are free resources on my web site that I hope people will use. And the most important thing to remember is that as citizens we have an amazing power to make a difference. We just need to apply that power effectively and persistently: If we do, there are no limits to what we can achieve.

Consumers Deserve the Truth in Fur Labeling

Over the past few years, The Humane Society of the United States has conducted a series of investigations revealing widespread deception in the fur fashion industry. Dozens of well-known retailers and designers sold fur-trimmed jackets advertised as “faux” fur, but laboratory testing concluded that the fur was from animals, including from dogs and raccoon dogs—a member of the canine family raised in factory farms and skinned alive in China to feed this trade.

In response to national outrage, and exposés of the issue on programs such as “Good Morning America” and “The Today Show,” many retailers and designers did the right thing and adopted corporate policy changes to address the problems of false advertising, mislabeling or no labeling. JC Penney, Calvin Klein, Tommy Hilfiger, Foot Locker and Overstock.com went fur-free, so that consumers can have the highest level of confidence in what they are buying. Andrew Marc, Michael Kors, Sean John, Sierra Trading Post, Donna Karan, and Rocawear pledged to stop using raccoon dog fur, curbing the cruel killing of animals resembling wild dogs.

But there are still outliers in the industry, and when the marketplace fails to protect consumers, lawmakers and enforcement agencies need to set things right. The HSUS has filed a lawsuit against a number of major retailers including Macy’s, Neiman Marcus, and Saks Fifth Avenue for engaging in false advertising and mislabeling of fur garments. HSUS and HSLF have been working to pass fur labeling laws at the state and federal levels—Delaware and New York recently passed measures, joining Massachusetts and Wisconsin (which passed theirs in the 1940s) as states that protect consumers from fraudulent fur selling. The New Jersey state Assembly passed a fur labeling bill that is now advancing through the Senate, while the Maryland state Senate also passed a measure this year that failed to make it through the House.

But commerce in fashion and retail are national and even global in scope, and we need a federal standard to level the playing field. Fur-trimmed jackets imported from China will be sold from Chicago to Dallas to Los Angeles. With the technological advances in synthetic fur, and the dyeing of animal fur colors like pink and green to make it look fake, even the most careful and knowledgable shoppers often can’t tell the difference simply by visually inspecting the material. Especially when consumers purchase designer jackets over the Internet, they have no choice but to trust the retailer’s statements about those garments.

That’s why the U.S. Congress should swiftly pass the Truth in Fur Labeling Act, introduced this week by Sen. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) in the Senate and Reps. Jim Moran (D-Va.) and Mary Bono Mack (R-Calif.) in the House. The bill would close a loophole in the federal fur labeling law which currently allows many fur-trimmed garments to be sold without labels. Since the 1950s, any fur garment sold in the U.S. has had to include a label indicating the species of animal used and the country of origin, but there’s a gaping loophole in the law that excludes fur-trimmed garments if the value of the fur is $150 or less. At current pelt prices, that means a jacket could have fur on its collar or cuffs from 30 rabbits ($5 each), nine chinchillas ($16 each), three foxes ($50 each), or three raccoon dogs ($45 each), and be sold without a label. The Federal Trade Commission estimates that one in every seven fur garments doesn’t require labeling.

Imagine if one in every seven medicine bottles or food packages didn’t have a label, especially if you avoid certain foods or medicines because of allergies or religious reasons. Consumers making well-informed decisions based on complete information is a cornerstone of a functioning market economy. Shoppers who may have allergies to fur, ethical objections to fur, or concern about the use of certain species, cannot make informed purchasing choices due to this gap in the current law.

It’s time for fur-trimmed jackets, parkas, sweaters, vests, and accessories to meet the same federal standard as other fur garments, and provide the same important product information that’s already required six times out of seven. Ask your members of Congress to support the Truth in Fur Labeling Act, S. 1076 and H.R. 2480, to protect shoppers from having the fur pulled over their eyes.

Boots on the Ground for Animals

As everyone knows, money talks. Whether an animal welfare law will be effective often turns on whether it gets adequately funded. And that spending is vital even when it comes in the worst economic times since the Great Depression. Our fortunes are intertwined with those of animals, and proper enforcement not only helps these creatures but also helps to improve food safety, public health, disaster preparedness, and other social concerns.

Thanks to the leadership of Congressmen Earl Blumenauer (D-Ore.) and Chris Smith (R-N.J.), a strong bipartisan group of 135 representatives—nearly one-third of the U.S. House—has submitted a letter to the House Agriculture Appropriations Subcommittee requesting funds to improve enforcement of key animal welfare laws in Fiscal Year 2010. These funds are critically needed to implement and enforce the Humane Methods of Slaughter Act, the Animal Welfare Act, the federal animal fighting law, and programs to help prepare for the needs of animals in disasters and to address the shortage of veterinarians in rural and inner-city areas and public health practice.

Now, Senators Carl Levin (D-Mich.) and David Vitter (R-La.) are leading a parallel effort in the U.S. Senate. Please urge your two senators to co-sign the Senate animal welfare funding group letter being circulated by Senators Levin and Vitter, or make their own individual requests, before the Senate Agriculture Appropriations Subcommittee’s deadline of May 8th. Click here to find your two U.S. senators and their phone numbers.

This is just the latest installment in a multiyear effort. The HSUS and HSLF have been steadily building the enforcement budgets for these laws, recognizing that laws on the books won’t do animals much good if they’re not enforced. For example, over the past ten years, we’ve succeeded in boosting the annual funding for enforcement of the Animal Welfare Act by 135% (a cumulative total of $71 million in new dollars to the program). Today, there are 111 USDA inspectors, compared to about 60 inspectors during the 1990s, to help ensure basic humane treatment at thousands of puppy mills, research laboratories, zoos, circuses, and other facilities.

If your U.S. representative signed the House funding letter, please take a moment to call and express thanks. It's important to give positive feedback to those who take action on behalf of animals. You can reach your representative through the Capitol switchboard at 202-224-3121, or click here to look up the office phone number. And please be sure to ask your two U.S. senators to sign onto the Senate letter before May 8th.

Thanks to your work, Congress can put more boots on the ground to protect animals from cruelty and abuse. It’s an investment in the animals’ future—and our own.

 

An Ounce of Python Prevention

“Swamp Things,” a fascinating article by Burkhard Bilger in the April 20 issue of The New Yorker, describes how the exotic pet industry has helped transform the state of Florida into “a biological cesspool of introduced life.” As fads of exotic birds, reptiles, and primates have come and gone, nonnative species have established themselves in the wild—transported by hurricanes or deliberately set loose by their owners. As Bilger explains:

On a single tree you could conceivably find plants and animals from six continents, including parrots from South America, mynah birds and Old World climbing ferns from Asia, vervet monkeys from Africa, ladybird beetles from Australia, and feral cats from Europe, via Africa and Asia…The state’s ecology is a kind of urban legend come true—the old alligator-flushed-down-the-toilet story repeated a thousand times with a thousand species.

There have been well-known cases of exotic species that should never have been introduced in the U.S.—whether they are the zebra mussels, the snakehead fish, or the Gambian rats that caused the 2003 multistate monkeypox outbreak. But the biggest problem for Florida is the new population of Burmese pythons living in the Everglades. These former “pets” can grow more than 20 feet long, weigh 200 pounds, and swallow an entire leopard.

Such ecological invasions can be prevented by a new bill being considered in Congress. The House Subcommittee on Insular Affairs, Oceans and Wildlife today held a hearing on H.R. 669, the Nonnative Wildlife Invasion Prevention Act. Introduced by Subcommittee Chairwoman Madeleine Bordallo (D-Guam), a great friend to animals, the bill would set up a process for evaluating exotic wildlife species to determine whether they should be allowed or prohibited for importation and interstate commerce. The legislation is endorsed by The Humane Society of the United States, Humane Society Legislative Fund, Defenders of Wildlife, National Audubon Society, The Nature Conservancy, Union of Concerned Scientists, and a number of other conservation and animal protection groups.

Some pet industry groups are yelping and howling over the proposal, claiming it will end all pet ownership. We hear this rhetoric all the time from our opponents who can’t defend inhumane practices on their merits, so they concoct some “slippery slope” justifications—they say that curbing abuses at puppy mills will end all dog breeding, that phasing out confinement of farm animals in crates and cages will end all agriculture, that toughening the anti-cockfighting laws will eliminate the right to own roosters. But they’re barking up the wrong tree.

First, the bill is aimed at exotic wildlife, not domestic household pets. It includes a specific exemption for cats, dogs, rabbits, goldfish, and horses. And the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is allowed to add more exempted species as it sees fit. The HSUS and HSLF are specifically requesting that hamsters, gerbils, guinea pigs, and ferrets be added to the exempted list.

Second, the legislation wouldn’t ban any species immediately upon passage. It allows the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to start a process, based on scientific information with public input, to determine whether an exotic wildlife species is harmful or not. During that process, which will take three years, there would be no restrictions on trade. If a species is then determined to be harmful, it would be added to the prohibited list.

Third, the bill grandfathers in any current exotic pets. So if a wildlife species is determined to be harmful and banned in the future, it would halt imports and interstate trade from that point forward. People who already own those animals would not have them taken away.

As Chairwoman Bordallo said, this morning’s hearing “should be seen as a starting point for a very important discussion. How can we proactively manage the influx of invasive species and reduce the economic and environmental costs associated with their establishment in the wild, but also be sensitive to legitimate concerns regarding the species that would be affected and realistic about the practicalities of implementation.”

The fact is, this is a common-sense reform that takes a proactive approach. Hundreds of millions of wild animals are arriving in the U.S. at an alarming pace through Miami, Los Angeles, and other points of entry. By the time invasive species establish themselves here, it’s often too late to do anything about the problems—and attempts at doing so, even while tilting at windmills, are costly and inhumane. Preventing wild animals from entering this country in the first place, if they are determined to be dangerous, is better for the environment, the economy, public health, and animal welfare.

Contact your members of Congress and ask them to support H.R. 669. Tell them when it comes to nonnative wildlife, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.

Giving Rare Species a Place on Our Planet

One of the quiddities of the U.S. Congress is that it’s slow by design. Bills have to make it through both the House and the Senate, via committee process and floor action in both chambers. That’s why more than 10,000 bills are introduced in a two-year congressional session, and only 4 to 5 percent actually become law.

There were several important wildlife protection measures that passed the House during the 110th Congress, but then stalled in the Senate. Those bills were reintroduced at the very start of the 111th Congress for quick action, and two of them—the Captive Primate Safety Act and the Shark Conservation Act—passed the House again earlier this year. The House is scheduled to vote on two more bills today that are considered unfinished business from last time around—a pair of important bipartisan policies that would help protect rare species of mammals and birds around the world.

H.R. 411, the Great Cats and Rare Canids Act—introduced by Reps. Jay Inslee (D-Wash.), John Tanner (D-Tenn.), Hal Rogers (R-Ky.), and Ed Royce (R-Calif.)—will provide financial resources for conservation programs to protect rare dog and cat species outside North America. A Senate version of the bill, S. 529, was introduced by Sens. Joseph Lieberman (I-Conn.) and Sam Brownback (R-Kan.). Species such as jaguars, clouded leopards, and African wild dogs are declining drastically due to habitat loss, poaching, disease, and human-wildlife conflict. This conservation funding will be a critical lifeline for rare dogs and cats ranging from the Ethiopian wolf to the Iberian lynx.

H.R. 388, the Crane Conservation Act—introduced by Reps. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.) and Ginny Brown-Waite (R-Fla.)—will do the same for imperiled crane populations both here at home and across the globe. A Senate version of the bill, S. 197, was introduced by Sens. Russ Feingold (D-Wis.) and Mike Crapo (R-Idaho). Cranes are the most endangered family of birds in the world, victims of pesticide, power lines, human encroachment, and even wars. Eleven of 15 species are at risk of extinction, and the North American whooping crane is the rarest of all cranes.

As Congresswoman Baldwin said, “Wisconsin has been a world leader in protecting this endangered family of birds. With federal support, the work done at the International Crane Foundation in Baraboo can inspire and instruct conservationists at home and abroad in their efforts to protect this magnificent species.”

The Multinational Species Conservation Fund already includes grant programs to help imperiled species—including Asian and African elephants, great apes, marine turtles, rhinoceroses, tigers, and neotropical migratory birds. Now, two separate accounts would be added to the fund specifically to assist cranes and rare dogs and cats.

Some reforms are so evident that there really is not a debate in society about the right course of action. Who could possibly think that Cape hunting dogs or black crowned cranes do not deserve a place on our planet, or jaguars or snow leopards for that matter? We hope today that the House approves these measures, and that Senate action follows swiftly. These are major advances in the waiting, and I extend our thanks to Natural Resources Committee Chairman Nick Rahall (D-W.Va.), and Insular Affairs, Oceans and Wildlife Subcommittee Chairwoman Madeleine Bordallo (D-Guam) and Ranking Member Henry Brown (R-S.C.), who have made passage of these measures a priority when the species need our help the most.