Blog

Fish & Wildlife Depend on Hunting and Fishing

Chad — Sun, 22 Jun 2008 15:59:00 GMT

Responsible hunting and fishing is a safe and healthy activity that millions of Americans enjoy with their families each year. Hunting and fishing generates over 70 billion dollars annually and benefits all wildlife at every level. Revenue generated from hunting and fishing not only contributes to our nations economy, but to habitat acquisition, habitat protection, habitat improvement, wildlife research, refuge management, winter feeding programs, trap and transplant, clean water and much more. Approximately 40 million Americans participate in hunting and fishing. The men, women and children who belong to credible conservation organizations and participate in hunting and fishing activities should be commended because they make the largest contributions to wildlife and habitat in America.

Wildlife management practices that utilize regulated hunting seasons with conservative bag limits are the sole reason we have healthy, plentiful wildlife populations in the United States today. The U.S. is a conservation role model recognized throughout the world. Hunters, fishers and conservation groups across America such as the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation, Ducks Unlimited, National Wild Turkey Federation, Pheasants Forever and all of their volunteers contribute far more money, resources and on the ground labor for fish, wildlife and habitat than the anti hunting groups such as the HSUS, or PETA ever have, or ever will. Not just game birds and game mammals benefit from these efforts; all living creatures including humans benefit from the work and dedication that our Nation’s conservation community provides.

We need to be very cautious not to make poor decisions regarding wildlife, farming, or pet ownership issues based on unscientific propaganda campaigns. The Humane Society of the United States (HSUS), PETA and other similar groups want to end all responsible hunting and animal use in America. These extreme animal rights groups are against all animal use including hunting, fishing, trapping, farming, rodeo, pet breeding, riding horses, medical research, eating meat and more. They routinely use grotesque, disrespectful pictures and extreme verbiage such as “slaughter”, “blood sport”, “mutilation” and more for shock value and to grab attention. Since their mission is purely emotional and lacks scientific credibility, these groups are forced to stage scenes, play to children, wear costumes, protest aggressively, twist the truth and exploit rare and unfortunate mishaps in a disingenuous attempt to legitimize their cause.

Hunters, fishers, campers, birdwatchers, photographers and many others cherish wildlife and understand the importance of conservation and responsible animal use. In America, this should always be a free choice and should not be decided through legislation, or ballot initiatives. We need to be good stewards of the land and be free to take care of our valuable resources in the manner they deserve. Our wildlife depends on all of us to make good decisions based on science and leaving wildlife management in the hands of the professionals; not to a group of extremists with an agenda. Together, if we use teamwork and common sense we will continue to foster healthy, plentiful and well balanced fish and wildlife populations for our future generations to enjoy and be proud of.

Is Your Lifestyle In Jeopardy?

Chad — Thu, 19 Jun 2008 20:36:00 GMT

PETA and the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) present the largest threat to the animal use groups in our country today. PETA and the HSUS are NOT your local animal shelters. These organizations are well funded, highly political and want to shut down a wide array of animal use activities including hunting, fishing, horse/dog racing, rodeo, medical research, farming, ranching, field trials, dog breeding, dog shows and more. They routinely utilize their multi million dollar budgets picketing, introducing legislation and ballot initiatives to force their agenda. These groups are against meat consumption and the use of animal products such as leather and fur. They promote a vegan lifestyle with campaigns utilizing children, websites and national media attention. These groups have no respect for American rights, freedoms and traditions where animal use is concerned. If you really want to donate to help animals and support responsible animal use, give directly to your local animal shelter, N.A.I.A., or join a credible conservation organization that works for wildlife.

Congo and Co. Euthanized

Yossarian — Thu, 19 Jun 2008 17:22:00 GMT

After a second attack -- this time on grandma -- Congo and three of his playmates were euthanized.

Congo, as you may remember, was the dog who was sentenced to death last year after attacking Giovanni Rivera, a Honduran illegal immigrant who'd shown up at Congo's to do some landscaping work. According to the family, Rivera provoked the dogs and threw down Mrs. James during the incident, which led to Congo responding with a completely reasonable three-minute, 96-bite attack. Of course, Rivera's side of the story is much different: Congo is an insane, vicious dog, who attacks for no apparent reason.

In the end, after months of protests and arguments that were more about illegal immigration than biting dogs, Rivera got a six-figure settlement, while the James' beloved German Shepherd was spared. Everyone was happy and the case was closed, right?

Well... apparently not.

And this time, it's a bit different.

TRENTON, N.J. - Congo, a dog who sparked a debate on immigration after biting a Honduran landscaper, was euthanized Wednesday after attacking his owner's mother in Princeton Township.
Congo and three other German shepherds jumped on Constance Ladd on Tuesday afternoon, causing her to fall as she left Elizabeth James' house, according to Princeton Township police. The 75-year-old had puncture wounds and lacerations to her forearm, chest and head, police said, and she complained of pain in her hip.

Stepmother jokes aside, there is simply no way to excuse this sort of behavior, is there? Well, I can't think of one, but you have to give James credit for trying:

"wasn't an attack at all. It was dogs jumping."

Eh, maybe not. If the only provocation was turning the doorknob, you've got a pretty big problem. Or, more accurately, four problems. With teeth.

Disappointing end to this story. The natural inclination is to hope that Congo was simply protecting his family -- to hope that the landscaper was provoking the animals and pawing all over Mrs. James. Not because you hate Rivera or illegal immigrants or human beings, of course, but because nobody wants to see a dog killed if it can be avoided. No matter how cynical we may become as a society, we still cling to the hope that our dogs carry the best of traits. Love, loyalty, playfulness, and a complete and utter abstention from three-minute long bite-fests. In this case, however, it's looking like Rivera was telling the truth about Congo...

California's Treatment of Farm Animals Act

Yossarian — Tue, 17 Jun 2008 18:06:00 GMT

An economic study on California's Treatment of Farm Animals Act was recently conducted by the United Egg Producers and the Pacific Egg & Poultry Association. Conclusions were disheartening:

$615 million loss in state economic activity
3,400 jobs lost by 2015
loss of $18.5 million in state tax revenue
higher prices for consumers

Doesn't sound good for egg producers and low-income consumers, does it? Yet it had no problem getting on this November's ballot: HSUS reports that 790,486 Californians signed petitions in support of this ballot initiative.

If the dire implications of the study are true, why would so many people -- especially in today's economy -- willingly sign such petitions?

Could it be that egg producers are suffering from some sort of image problem?

Animal Lovers and Nanotechnology Have Much in Common - Who Knew? by Kerrin Winter Churchill

kerrinw — Fri, 04 May 2007 15:08:00 GMT

This morning I received a call from a successful business man, "Bob" an old friend who I haven't spoken to in years. He is deeply immersed in the Nanotechnology trade and I thought our worlds were really too different at this point to have much in common. But you know how it goes - dogs are the natural world's Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon - we had more in common that we realized.

Enraptured, I listened as Bob told me his story, "Last year I was a guest speaker at a Nanotechnology conference in Paris. There were protesters all dressed in black with black hoods. They held signs protesting Nanotechnology as if it were something evil. As we walked into the building they were throwing things at us and chanting their rage. It was unbelievable". According to Bob the average person knows little about Nanotechnology but they have read some really good Science Fiction. "Michael Cricthon wrote a book about tiny robots that eat human flesh. That's what the big scare is all about." But it's more than just funny. According to Bob, there is a large "anti-science" movement in the world and it doesn't want scientists fussing around at the molecular level." These are hate based people filled with fear and even though the protesters don't really know the first thing about Nanotechnology - they're against it.

Sound familiar? As Bob talked,I roamed my mind's inner landscape, making notes of familiar land-marks. When was the last time you spoke to an Animal Rights activist that knew a Quarter Horse from a Thoroughbred, an English Toy Spaniel from a Cavalier King Charles Spaniel, a Seal Point Siamese cat from a Color Point Oriental? How many people do you know that are against Pit Bulls who have actually had experience with this type of dog? Bob continued with his own observations - the problem is these 'anti-science' people start lobbying and gain an audience with a Congressman. Their emotional appeal strikes a chord with the politician and they work to pass laws banning Nanotechnology without ever understanding what it's really all about. You know what Nanotechnology is? It's building very small objects under a high powered microscope. When you ban Nanotechnology, you are really banning the use of high powered microscopes. Now how can you regulate that? It's insane."

Insane. That's the word resonating with me these days and it made me think of my father who would get my sister and me up at 7 AM on the weekends to help him with the yard-work. When we would complain about having to hoe the beans or tie up tomatoes before 9. he would say, "Work is good for you. Don't forget, 'idleness is the Devil's workshop.'" Though I may not have understood my Dad's words then, I surely do now. I really think these protesters need something to keep their bodies and minds active. They should plant a garden, find a horse barn to muck stalls or find some real problems to solve - but these things are not glamorous enough for our idle youth. Being an "activist" seems to be a trend for the children of the upwardly mobile. Children without chores,outside interests or family commitments have too much time on their hands and look for entertainment. What a better game to play as a "young adult" than "Save the world from evil scientists and animal exploiters."

But twenty years later Bob and I have even more in common that a kindred wariness of youthful activism. Bob's business partner wrote the book on Nanotechnology - he has struggled past the anti science brigade - can you guess what he does for a hobby? He breeds and enjoys pit bulls. No, he doesn't use them to fight. He loves the breed for the same reasons thousands of others do - "They're people oriented, faithful, loyal and fun loving" and to his sensibilities, there isn't a more beautiful dog breed on earth. So by day, "Mr. Nano" brushes aside the activist flies that buzz around his work but at night, as he enjoys the company of his beloved dogs - his heart sinks knowing that legislation making it illegal to own his version of canine perfection may be coming to his own town very soon.

What will he do then? What can any of us do? "Become a part of the solution long before it is a problem" said Attorney Mark Cushings who spoke at the NAIA all animal summit two weeks ago. "You have to get to know the political leaders in your own home town. If they know you as a sane, rational animal person - when there is a crisis involving animals, the politicians will look to you for guidance."

The Nano-technologists already know their strategy to keep trade and technology free in the United States maybe now they'll join us in helping to keep breed specific legislation from spreading further. Who knew that building instruments on the molecular level and breeding dogs had so much in common but isn't that life in the 21st Century? Amazing but true.

Show Dog Enthusiasts, Come Together, Right Now! by Kerrin Winter Churchill

kerrinw — Wed, 25 Apr 2007 15:26:00 GMT

American dog show enthusiasts are famous for living in their own little worlds. Who can blame them? Like most middle class people living in the United States, the person who shows dogs for hobby or lifelong endeavor, works full time and has little left over for anything else. But we are also living in a politcially correct society where dog owners - who do not understand what show dogs are all about - have been repeatedly told that people who breed and show dogs are adding to the numbers of unwanted dogs at animal shelters. This of course, is not true but while the dog show enthusiast goes about his or her merry way, grooming and training and conditioning for the next big show - misguided masses swayed by animal rights rhetoric - are poised to change our laws - in every town across America - making it impossible for you and me to show, breed or love our purebred dogs.

Last week I attended a dynamic all-animal conference in Vancouver, Washington. It was held by the National Animal Interest Alliance and the information I absorbed, the ideas that I walked away with have resonated deeply.

As catharsis I will be writing about the many things I learned from this experience. The conference was well attended. For three days, we listend to lectures and watched power-point presentations on the many-faceted world of animal welfare. There were speakers from many different persepectives. New infomation on the Hoarder mentality was shared with the group, we learned something of the concerns of Animal Control Officers, got an indepth look at dog fighting in the U.S., we learned that cat fanciers face the same problems as dog breeders and I listened deeply as a Golden Retriever breeder and physicians presented in a slide show, the serious nature of dog bites - something he sees in the ER on a regualr basis which is why breeding for sound temperaments is above all else in his book. At the NAIA summit were Psychiatrists,Veterinarians, Medical Doctors, AKC dog show judges, AKC field reps, a rep from the Cat Fanciers Association, PhD's, Lawyers, Lobbiests, an expert on Zoos, bird experts, cat experts and dog experts. There were also a couple of independant writers like me. But - and this is a very important "But" ....

...there was not one single editor of a major dog magazine present at this conference. Not one book publisher. None of the magazines that depend on our world of dogs to keep them floating - sent a writer - or a representative. Indeed, while the conference was taking place, two of our best dog show magazines had representatives visiting China to help launch dog showing over there. Now, don't get me wrong, I adore those "representatives" I really do - but I do not undertand why mentoring people who live in a country where basic human rights are routinely ignored - is more important than keeping our own country safe for dog owners and breeders?

Why didn't the succesful American dog magazines send a representative to the NAIA animal summit? It can't possibly be budget concerns. They may say that but who are they kidding? Editors, publishers,board of directors wake up. You make your living from a free society that embraces dogs. What will you be doing in ten years if the American public's right to own and breed dogs is gone? What will you publish then? A museum piece?

But lets not just single out the dog magazines, there weren't reps from there weren't any reps from the Horse, Cat or Bird magazines either - nor were there any of the folks that burn up the newsgroup chat group wires.

Why weren't you there?

My life in dogs has taken me places that I could not have imagined as a child. Because of dogs I have camped out under the stars in the Rocky Mountains, I have paddled canoes on the Chesapeake River, I have walked the halls of the National Portrait Gallery, I have attended the great Westminster Kennel Club dog show, I have ridden to hounds, photographed the Kentucky Derby, chronicled herds of Mustangs running free in Wyoming, shot over bird dogs, authored award winning articles, rescued dogs in the aftermath of Katrina, mentored under greatness and much much more. Of all the things I've done in my "life in dogs", I feel nothing has been more important than my attendence at this conference because if someone is going to keep dog ownership and breeding as a way of life in America, it falls to me. No, I'm not being arrogant. What I mean is, it falls to me and everyone else in the United States that loves dogs and is committed enough to put their words and energies into action.

It is time to take a stand. Stop being afraid of what your readers will think. NAIA Director, Patti Strand likes to quote a famous poster that once hung on the office door of an associate. It read, "Lead, follow or get out of the way." Are you afraid your readers will be against you because they've been brainwashed by the animal rights movement? Remember, "lead follow or get out of the way". If you happen to make your bread and butter from animals, I would suggest that you start leading your readership to the truth - a truth you can articulate through the many pages of facts on this very website.

We are in a battle for our right to own and breed dogs. And it really is simply black or white. You are either for the rights of an individual to own and breed dogs or you are not. All else - philosophy of gang members, irresponsible ownership laws, animal shelter issues - all these things can be discussed within our own circle of animal die-hards while our rights as breeders and users of animals remain in tact - but only if we participate in a solution.

Where were you?

Today in California a very important bill is being decided. (AB 1634) which will either be defeated or cause thousands of California citizens to lose their right to breed dogs. Its a mandatory spay and neuter - to be frank, this bill is a cow patty dressed up in silk ribbons. The pet people don't understand a shrinking gene pool so getting the word out to state representatives and laypeople fell to the small, sect of purebred enthusiasts. Has it passed? Has it failed? What is certain is that those old arguments we all have - over tail sets and croups, shoulder lay-back and length of forearms, will all be mute points if our right to breed and own dogs is removed from our American way of life.

And while we jealously keep an arms length distance between ourselves and our competitiors, the animal rights movement is embracing everyone who is against us. Collectively, the animal rights supporters are working systematically to eliminate dogs from our society - so while Whippet breeders worry over size and misplaced croups - while English Cocker enthusiasts discuss the proper cobby body versus the "English Setter look" - and while Briarders malign American type in favor of the long bodied "Euro-style" - the Animal Rights promoters see us all as simply "The enemy".

"Where were you when the lights went out?" is a question we may all someday soon be asking ourselves. What will be your answer?

Genocide California Style AB 1634, by Kerrin Winter Churchill

kerrinw — Wed, 25 Apr 2007 05:29:00 GMT

Its late in Ohio. One O'clock in the morning and I should be sleeping but there's a fire inside my head and sleep just won't come. I can't stop thinking about the farm dogs in California - the ones that herd sheep, head cattle and make short work of long days for the rancher.

No offense (as my 10 year old niece would say) but who's idiotic idea was AB 1634 and have they ever stepped out of their tidy little neighborhoods and breathed in fresh country air? If they did, maybe their thinking caps would be working. Thinking is weak on this bill and it is obvious that the authors know nada about the nature of dogs.

For a true animal advocate, there's a lot of things to hate about AB 1634 but the bottom line is this: it will eliminate breeding stock for all dogs that do not compete in an official capacity through a registry.

Here's a good example of what I'm "talking" about - some dog breeders don't have time or the desire to show off their dogs. They breed dogs in the most traditional sense of all - because they need willing, capable working partners to help them run the farm or ranch. A good dog that is busy actually earning a living, by pushing stock, bringing home the cows, making sure the chickens don't escape, keeping predators away from young lambs, etc., is exactly the kind of dog that should reproduce because they are useful and willing workers - Darwin's dream dog. But now here's the rub - stock dogs/farm dogs, they are working dogs - not always registered and hardly ever used in any form of competition - so under the guidelines of AB 1634 - they are not worthy to reproduce. The bill is idiocy personified.

While I am an advocate of showing dogs in performance events and the conformation arena, it is pretty obvious to me, as it should be to anyone who has open eyes to see, that dogs that actually perform in real condtions - rather than the made up conditions of the performance "arena", need to keep their reproductive "equipment" intact so that their special talents and qualities can be passed on for generations to come.

All AB 1634 will do is raise up the price for young dogs and cause a blackmarket for them before the bottom falls out and dogs become extinct. If this bill pases, watch for cost increases and the rise of pet theft in California as theives take advantage of a weak supply in a strong demand market.

Can you imagine the extinction of the species we know as dogs? I can. That's why I am up so late typing on this keyboard. Authors, while you might think you're helping to eliminate the unruly dogs of South or East LA with this bill, all you are really going to do is cause the average dog (or cat) lover to spend more for a pet - because it will be harder to find youngsters to buy. Meanwhile, ranchers will have to invest in more men and fourwheelers to do the job of one good stock dog.

...and do you think gang members won't find a way to breed their dogs? Sure they will. They're criminals - here's a newslfash - criminals break laws all the time.

Only a very small percent of the population show their dogs in any kind of competition enough to quantify keeping their dogs' overies and testicals intact under AB 1634. The rest will have to be sexually altered. If this happens - if the lawmakers decide against the dog tomorrow morning - then the begining of the end will be in place - the clock will begin ticking down towards the extinction of the species we know as dogs.

Wanna know why? Because good dog breeders need more than a pair of dogs to create a family tree and sometimes the best mating partner is not a competition dog. When you hear an "instant dog expert" negaitvely describing "inbred" purebred dogs - he or she is talking about a very narrow family tree. If AB 1634 is passed, the canine family tree will be pruned severely and will begin to resemble a telephone pole. Shelter dogs are always spayed and neutered so there will be no viable breeding pairs coming from shelters.

One neutered shelter dog male + one spayed shelter dog female = 0 puppies.

One neutered stock dog male + one spayed stock dog female = 0 puppies.

If this scenario begins to spread, how long do you think it will be until there are no dogs at all?

About 10 to 15 years - the life span of the average dog.

Remember what "they" say.

Extinction is forever.

Please God, let the nice men and women voting tomorrow morning be dog lovers. I pray they Vote No on AB 1634. Amen.

ANIMAL RIGHTS, A CULTURE OF CONFUSION, by Kerrin Winter-Churchill

kerrinw — Sun, 25 Mar 2007 06:22:00 GMT

Almost everyone I know is an animal lover and yet, so often we stand divided by something I call "The culture of confusion". "I believe in animal rights" says a friend of mine - (a fellow breeder) who ads, "all animals have the right to be cared for and fed and be treated well" she continues, as her latest litter of "hopefulls" chew on the livingroom sofa. As she stoopes down to pick up soggy newspaper, the puppies run to her, hoping for some affection and they are not dissapointed. One by one my friend picks up the puppies, kissing each one before putting it down for another.

Clearly she loves her breed and I know from experience that potential owners will be heavily screened before they'll ever be privledged to sign a buyer's contract and take home one of her babies. But for all the studying she has done on breeding and cultivating bloodlines, my friend has sequestered herself from the outside world - a world that threatens her very passion - "I don't listen to any of those news stories" says my friend. "I have enough to think about. "When someone sends me an e-mail about animal rights, I just hit the delete key." My stomach sinks when I hear these words because I don't have the luxary of isolation. I have lived in the broader scope of dogs for too long and I see so clearly that my dear friend hasn't a clue to what the expression "Animal Rights" really means. She is not alone. Another of my aquaintences is, like me, a professional photographer with a speciality in dogs. He works for all the major dog publications and is a reliable worker at the really big dog shows such as Westminster and the AKC Eukanuba Invitational. He makes his living off of dogs and yet, if you ask him, he will tell you "I believe in animal rights." When first he said this to me, I was thunder-struck. Surely I had misunderstood. I asked him to explain his position and he said, "Of course animals have the right to not be mistreated. They should have the right to be well fed and loved and have a good life. That's why I support animal rights groups. They will make sure that laws are changed in favor of the animals."

Now I would like to think that these two misguided animal lovers were isolated cases. Surely anyone who is involved in the world of dogs should know that animal rights activists want to outlaw breeding. Dog lovers should understand that animal rights activists are intentionally or unintentionally promoting the extinction of the species that we all know and love as dogs - but just like my misguided friends, they do not know this because they are the type of animal lover who acts and thinks purely on emotion rather than taking the time to read and research. Making matters worse, when these people hear voices like mine they think "Alarmists" - stirring up the energy in an otherwise "don't worry, be happy" kind of world. I have learned that to make my aquaintences understand the dire times in which we are living, an economy of words is needed.

Emotional reactives have a short attention span. And so, animal advocates who understand that the animal rights movement is subversive and omnipresent must come up with a simple and direct language to use with their fellow dog lovers. No one that I know actually wants to see dogs as a species extinguished from our society - but in my opinion, that is where we as a society are headed unless we can make all dog loving people aware of what is really going on. Simply put, if dog breeding is banned - there will be no more puppies. Without puppies, there will be no more dogs. Sure, if all breeders are banned from creating puppies, shelter dogs will suddenly be in demand. But what do we do once all the spayed and neutered shelter dogs are adopted? Where will one go to buy a dog? Where will your children's children find a dog?

In the History Museum.

Dog lovers who support Animal Rights groups are confused. Of course animals should be well cared for and humanely treated - we all believe in "Animal Welfare" which should not to be confused with the term "Animal Rights". The expression Animal Rights represents an anti-animal movement in our society that will end in the separation of humans and animals - with the eventual extinction of domestic animals.

"Will dogs become extinct? The question is best answered with another question. Do you believe in supporting animal rights? If you do, than the answer is yes, they probably will become extinct. Now, here's one more question for you; is that your intended outcome?

Ten years or more ago, I stumbled upon a book "The Hijacking of the Humane Movement" by Patti Strand and it opened my eyes. Before then, I was still the same old dog breeder - an advocate of beautiful, performance dogs bred to the standard but I was confused by those HSUS direct mail pieces, the pleas from emerging groups like PETA who begged for money on behalf of all the homeless dogs. Somehow those letters made my neck hair bristle but I didn't really know why. I had long volunteered at local animal shelters (my work with local shelters dates back to the seventies and I have been involved in rescue work for just as long - way before it became the trend) but it wasn't until I read Mrs. Strand's book that my eyes were opened wide. Since then, I have witnessed first-hand, the demise of my favorite animal welfare shelter which fell prey and was taken over by an aggresive animal rights board. I watched in horror as excellent and effective animal welfare employees - who had dedicated their lives for the sake of animal welfare - were professionally destroyed by a new regime which cared nothing for the individual human or animal. Mrs. Strand's book gave me the words to understand what was taking place before my very eyes.

Now I am writing for the group that Strand so dilligently created. If you are reading this and my words resonate with you, please consider becoming a member of the National Animal Interest Alliance. In doing so, you will be helping in no small way, to keep the rights of responsible dog breeders and owners intact. In the meantime, try coming up with a simplistic paragraph to help our fellow purebred dog enthusiasts understand modern culture and the choreographed confusion which befuddles their thinking. I say "orchestrated" because the animal rights groups have been planning this line-blurring for many years and our fellow breeders, fanciers and enthusiasts are falling victim to a soothing mind control that presents us in black hats while animal activists who carve away at our rights to own and breed dogs appear to be wearing white.