O.G. Buckeye Schutzhund Club
Founded in 1972
Affiliated with United Schutzhund Clubs of America since 1982

Home

Officers

Members

Schutzhund 3 Club

Event Schedule

Trial Entry Form

Pictures

Animal Rights Platform

Breed Survey Requirements

Conformation Show Requirements

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Animal Welfare vs Animal Rights – Keeping informed

Michele Scarberry

 

#10 on the Animal Rights Platform states unequivocally: We Strongly discourage any further breeding of companion animals, including pedigreed or purebred dogs or cats

 

There is a distinct difference between animal rights and animal welfare. In the light of all the recent BSL legislation, the animal rights platform has come to the forefront and animal welfare has been lost in the shuffle.  We, as breeders, trainers and supporters of the German Shepherd Dog need to be well informed about the difference between the animal rights and animal welfare platforms.

Animal Rights platform believes: that animals have the same legal rights as humans, with the most basic right of not being owned or used for any purpose by human beings.  Supporters of animal rights seek to virtually end all ownership, use of animals, and breeding of all animals.  True animal rights activists are vegan vegetarians meaning:  they eat nothing that is an animal, or from an animal by-product. They envision a world in which no animals are left, contending that humans have mistreated animals, and that humans no longer deserve the "right" to have any animals. They want to end the existence of all animals by sterilization;  i.e. spaying and neutering.   They want all domesticated animals to be set free, to allow animals to live freely in the wilderness, and to stop all hunting of any wild animals

Animal Welfare is about the humane treatment of animals. This original humane movement started in England in the 1840s.  Animal welfare emphasizes respect and concern for animals, a balance between owning, and using animals.  Allowing owners and breeders their right to own, use, and to breed animals.

Animal Rights extremists have manipulated public perception with embellished and distorted information. They are the largest most vocal group impacting laws and issues relating to animals, and they are extremely well funded.   Animal Rights organizations spend a significant portion of their donations on legislative initiatives. While some of their initiatives appear (on the surface) to make sense to the general public, they ignore the more workable alternatives which do not support the abolishment animals.  Animal abolishment would have severe and dangerous effect to our society.  Animals have a significant place in our society:  agriculture, industry, research, sports, and entertainment, in addition to being pets.  Animals, and our use of them, impacts the economy, culture, environment and life-style.

Thus, without public awareness, the rights of all animal owners is being gradually eroded, while animal welfare is getting lost in the shuffle.  Most of the animal rights objectives are very subtle and aimed at gradually achieving their end results:  for example,  the effort to substitute "companion animal” for "pet”  within our laws and our vocabulary, in the process, it gradually destroys the concept of pet ownership and your ability to own pets.

 Quote: Ingrid Newkirk, Co-Founder of PETA – “We would no longer allow breeding....if people had companion animals in their homes, those animals would have to be refugees from the animal shelters and the streets....But as the surplus of purebred cats and dogs (artificially designed by centuries of forced breeding) declined, eventually companion animals would be phased out, and we would return to a more symbiotic relationship - enjoyment at a distance." 

 

Animal Rights Agenda has set goals for ending the use of animals, this animal rights agenda was published in Animals' Agenda magazine, November 1987, and reprinted in The Hijacking of the Humane Movement, by Rod and Patti Strand (Barnes and Noble)

  1. We are firmly committed to the eventual abolition by law of animal research, and call for an immediate prohibition of painful experiments and tests. The billions of dollars disbursed annually by the National Institutes of Health for animal experiments should be re-channeled into direct health care, preventive medicine, and biomedical research using non-animal tests and procedures. In addition, the government should fund projects to develop and promote non-animal technologies where they do not yet exist so that animal experiments may be rapidly phased out. In the meantime, procedural mechanisms must be established to allow for greater public scrutiny of all research using animals.
  2. The use of animals for cosmetics and household product testing, tobacco and alcohol testing, psychological testing, classroom demonstrations and dissection, and in weapons development or other warfare programs must be outlawed immediately.
  3. We encourage vegetarianism for ethical, ecological, and health reasons. As conversion of plant protein to animal flesh for human consumption is an energetically inefficient means of food production, a vegetarian diet allows for wiser use of the world's limited food resources. Livestock production is a major source of environmental degradation. Furthermore, a shift in human diet from animal foods to plant food would result in a lower incidence of heart diseases and cancer and better health generally. Vegetarian meals should be made available to all public institutions including primary and secondary schools. Nutritional education programs currently administered by the Department of Agriculture should be handled by an agency charged with promoting public health rather than promoting the interest of agribusiness.
  4. Steps should be taken to begin phasing out intensive confinement systems of livestock production, also called factory farming, which causes severe physical and psychological suffering for the animals kept in overcrowded and unnatural conditions. As animal agriculture depletes and pollutes water and soil resources, and destroys forests and other ecosystems, we call for the eventual elimination of animal agriculture. In the meantime, the exportation of live farm animals for overseas slaughter must be regulated to ensure humane treatment. Livestock grazing on US public lands should be immediately prohibited. Internationally, the US should assist poorer countries in the development of locally based, self-reliant agricultural systems.
  5. The use of herbicides, pesticides, and other toxic agricultural chemicals should be phased out. Predator control on public lands should be immediately outlawed and steps should be taken to introduce native predators to areas from which they have been eradicated in order to restore the balance of nature.
  6. Responsibility for enforcement of animal welfare legislation must be transferred from the Department of Agriculture to an agency created for the purpose of protecting animals and the environment.
  7. Commercial trapping and fur ranching should be eliminated. We call for an end to the use of furs while recognizing Western society's responsibility to support alternative livelihood for native peoples who now rely on trapping because of the colonial European and North American fur industries.
  8. Hunting, trapping, and fishing for sport should be prohibited. State and federal agencies should focus on preserving and re-establishing habitat for wild animals instead of practicing game species management for maximum sustainable yield. Where possible, native species, including predators, should be reintroduced to areas from which they have been eradicated. Protection of native animals and plants in their natural surroundings must be given priority over economic development plans. Further, drainage of wetlands and development of shore areas must be stopped immediately.
  9. Internationally, steps should be taken by the US government to prevent further destruction of rain forests. Additionally, we call on the US government to act aggressively to end international trade in wildlife and goods produced from exotic an/or endangered fauna or flora.
  10. We strongly discourage any further breeding of companion animals, including pedigreed or purebred dogs and cats. Spay and neuter clinics should be subsidized by State and municipal governments.  Commerce in domestic and exotic animals for the pet trade should be abolished.
  11. We call for an end to the use of animals in entertainment and sports such as dog racing, dog and cock fighting, fox hunting, hare coursing, rodeos, circuses, and other spectacles and a critical reappraisal of the use of animals in quasi-educational institutions such as zoos and aquariums. These institutions, guided not by humane concerns but by market imperatives, often cruelly treat animals and act as agents of destruction for wild animals. In general, we believe that animals should be left in their appropriate environments in the wild, not showcased for entertainment purposes. Any animals held captive must have their psychological, behavioral, and social needs satisfied.
  12. Advances in biotechnology are posing a threat to the integrity of species, which may ultimately reduce all living beings to the level of paten table commodities. Genetic manipulation of species to produce transgenic animals must be prohibited.

Who are these groups?

USSP (United States Socialist Party): The Socialist Party recognizes the rights of animals to live free from unnecessary pain and suffering, and the responsibility of people to protect those rights.  We support the spaying and neutering of pets to prevent the massive extermination resulting from overpopulation.  We oppose entertainment that causes pain to animals.   We call for the banning of the fur trade.  We support greater inclusion and enforcement of the Endangered Species Act.   We call for a ban on animal experimentation for product development, and for an oversight board to examine and limit the use of animals in scientific and medical research.  We oppose factory farming practices of overcrowding, drugging, and otherwise cruelly treating animals

ARCO (Animal Rights Community Online): is an online international community of individuals and groups working to spread the animal rights message and promoting less cruel diets, as vegetarian, vegan and fruitarian alternatives. Their Mission Is To Preserve, Promote And Advance the well-being of animals.

303 New York, NY 10012ty USA

The Animals’ Platform : to advance the moral and legal status of animals in public policy throughout the four-year U.S. presidential term starting in 2005

 The Institute for Animals and Society:  invites public comment on The Animals’ Platform Thereafter, we will produce updated and revised editions on a two-year cycle timed to coincide with the U.S. presidential and off-year elections. Once The Animals’ Platform (2005-2006) is in place, we will launch a campaign to secure individual and organizational endorsement of and commitment to the platform.  With movement-wide support, we will mobilize Americans to question candidates for public office and elected representatives about their positions on the issues addressed in The Animals’ Platform.  Although nonprofit organizations are prohibited by law from supporting individual candidates, we can and should encourage the increasing numbers of voters who care about animals to keep the animals’ interests in mind when deciding which candidates to support.

-Integral to the future success of the animal rights movement is our ability to position animal issues in the arena of public policy. Heretofore, we’ve mainly focused on a strategy of public education. Increasingly, however, positive developments (e.g., the passage of pro-animal citizen initiatives) indicate that now is the time for action in the mainstream political arena.

 

Friends of Animals, founded in 1957, advocates for the right of animals to live free according to their own terms.

 

DONOTEASTUS.ORG: a non-profit organization that supports the rights of animals with billboards, posters, advertisements, postcards, books, videos and other means, we welcome all people who would like to help us help the animals. We are happy to send this material FREE OF CHARGE, but since all of this effort is based on contributions, we would be very glad - particularly with large orders – to receive a contribution to help carry the distribution of these materials to the third world countries where the need is great both for the people who suffer hunger because the grain produced in their countries is used to feed the animals  in factory farming, and for the wild animals that are often the only source of food left for the people to eat. 

 

SETA (Students for the Ethical Treatment of Animals): a college university animal rights group  formed in 1994. Their mission is to educate both students and community members on animal rights issues, and to inform people of the role that they can play in animal rights activism. SETA's national affiliate is PETA.

PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals): with more than 1.6 million members and supporters, PETA is the largest animal rights organization in the world. PETA focuses its attention on the four areas in which the largest numbers of animals suffer the most intensely for the longest periods of time: on factory farms, in laboratories, in the clothing trade, and in the entertainment industry. We also work on a variety of other issues, including the cruel killing of beavers, birds and other "pests," and the abuse of backyard dogs.  PETA works through public education, cruelty investigations, research, animal rescue, legislation, special events, celebrity involvement, and protest campaigns

The PETA Statement on Companion Animals --"In a perfect world, all other-than-human animals would be free of human interference, and dogs and cats would be part of the ecological scheme, as they were before humans domesticated them and as they remain in some parts of the undeveloped world."

PETA pamphlet, Companion Animals: Pets or Prisoners?--  "In a perfect world, animals would be free to live their lives to the fullest: raising their young, enjoying their native environments, and following their natural instincts. However, domesticated dogs and cats cannot survive "free" in our concrete jungles, so we must take as good care of them as possible. People with the time, money, love, and patience to make a lifetime commitment to an animal can make an enormous difference by adopting from shelters or rescuing animals from a perilous life on the street. But it is also important to stop manufacturing "pets," thereby perpetuating a class of animals forced to rely on humans to survive."

PETA marketing ploys:

Become a Member of PETA - We need your financial support in order to put a stop to cruelty to animals. An annual donation of $16 or more entitles you to many member benefits. Members receive a FREE year's subscription to our quarterly magazine Animal Times, packed full of the latest news, delicious vegetarian recipes, and easy tips on how to stop animal suffering in your own community

Wanted: Compassionate Students: Students ages 13 to 24 who are ready to get more involved. The Street Team promotes animal rights at the grassroots level, spreading awareness in communities and making sure that our message is visible and heard. Once you've joined, check out the activities that you can do to get points, which you can exchange for all kinds of free stuff, from T-shirts and messenger bags to CDs and bumper stickers

PETA Business Friends is a new and innovative partnership for kindhearted companies willing to assist in PETA's groundbreaking work to stop animal abuse and suffering

ASPCA (The American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals): was founded in 1866 as the first humane organization in the Western Hemisphere, aristocrat Henry Bergh—proposed a society to prevent cruelty to animals before the New York State Legislature.  In 1894 the ASPCA was placed in charge of picking up strays and maintaining the city’s poorly run shelters

HSUS (Humane Society of the United States: has worked since 1954 to promote the protection of all animals. With nearly ten million members and constituents, The HSUS is the nation’s largest and most powerful animal protection organization, working in the United States and abroad to defend the interests of animals, celebrating the human-animal bond, and fighting animal cruelty and abuse in all of its forms. Major campaigns target these primary issues: factory farming, animal fighting, animal cruelty, fur trade and inhumane sport hunting practices.  Other campaigns take on puppy mills, private ownership of exotic animals, greyhound racing, and unacceptable animal research and testing.  The 110th Congress is at an unprecedented point in history when it comes to animal protection legislation. They have already celebrated a major victory this year with the passage of  H.R.137 and Animal Fighting Prohibition Enforcement Act .

Organizations fighting Animal Rights:

U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance is a national association of sportsmen organization that protects the rights of hunters, anglers and trappers in the courts, legislatures, at the ballot, in Congress and through public education programs.

 Sportsmen want Pennsylvania to scrap new dog care regulations that will eliminate hunting with dogs, while new enforcement measures for dog law violators are implemented and evaluated.  The attorney general’s office granted a  Department of Agriculture request to allow prosecutors to try criminal cases dealing with the state dog law.  According to the Philadelphia Inquirer, prosecutors have been acting strictly as advisors to dog wardens, who have often been unable to convict animal abusers, many of whom are represented by professional attorneys. While violators escaped justice, the department has pursued a restrictive set of new regulations that will put sporting dog kennels and hobby breeders out of business. Breeders who can afford to remain in operation after complying with the regulations will be forced to raise prices, since the state estimates the cost of implementation will be as much as $10,000 per breeder. These factors will leave hunters seeking to buy quality puppies to retrieve ducks, chase rabbits or point pheasants high and dry.  The regulations were proposed at the direction of Gov. Ed Rendell, whose stated goal is to “remove the stain of puppy mills from the commonwealth.” The regulations will apply to the hobbyist the same as it will to the large commercial breeder. The USSA and its allies in the fast-growing Sporting Dog Defense Coalition have tried for months to convince the Department of Agriculture to withdraw the regulations and rewrite the dog law to create a distinction between commercial operations and hobbyists. Sportsmen have repeatedly inquired whether there is sufficient enforcement ability to address abusive breeders. Sportsmen’s groups continue to implore the department to abandon the meat-cleaver approach to the problem and give the new prosecutorial abilities a chance to show results. They have also committed to help change the dog law, which will allow the department to isolate the abusive commercial breeders. However, the Department of Agriculture insists that the regulations continue to move forward. Making matters worse, recent rhetoric from the agency and the governor’s office refers to a need for  “uniform regulations that apply to all kennels”  in Pennsylvania.  A one-size-fits-all policy has contributed to many hunters’ beliefs that there is an anti-hunting agenda behind the effort.   “Hunters support bringing abusive commercial breeders to justice,” said Sexton. “However, the governor and the Department of Agriculture know how sportsmen will be hurt by the proposed rules, so our members and allies wonder who is behind the continual push that ignores hunters’ pleas.”  

The American Kennel Club (AKC): supports reasonable, enforceable, non-discriminatory laws to govern the ownership of dogs. The AKC believes that dog owners should be responsible for their dogs. We support laws that: establish a fair process by which specific dogs are identified as "dangerous" based on stated, measurable actions; impose appropriate penalties on irresponsible owners; and establish a well-defined method for dealing with dogs proven to be dangerous. We believe that, if necessary, dogs proven to be "dangerous" may need to be humanely destroyed. The AKC strongly opposes any legislation that determines a dog to be "dangerous" based on specific breeds or phenotypic classes of dogs. The AKC Canine Legislation Department monitors and provides input for federal, state and local legislation governing responsible dog ownership. The AKC retains a government relations consultant to represent AKC views in Washington, D.C. By maintaining a visible presence in the nation's capital, the AKC continues to serve as a leader in preserving and promoting canine welfare, while protecting the rights and interests of the dog fancy. AKC also coordinates legislative efforts with other animal-related organizations in Washington, D.C., and initiates nationwide efforts by the dog fancy for important items of federal legislation. AKC monitors state legislation pertaining to dogs with the cooperation of more than 40 statewide federations of AKC clubs. Nine reasonable, enforceable, and non-discriminatory state dangerous dog laws have been enacted through the efforts of the AKC and its legislative contacts. Consumer protection laws for dog buyers and kennel regulations are other types of state legislation handled by the AKC. The AKC strongly supports the training and use of dogs to provide assistance and service to humans. Dogs provide valuable service as: seeing eye dogs; hearing dogs; therapy dogs; handicapped assistance dogs; drug, bomb, and arson detection dogs; and tracking dogs to locate missing persons and fugitives. The AKC opposes those who seek to define the assistance and service dogs provide to humans as exploitative. The AKC encourages the continuation and further development of the use of dogs for these and similar purposes.  The AKC recognizes the invaluable contributions to both human and veterinary medical knowledge and practices that have resulted from medical research on animal subjects, including dogs. The AKC believes that all efficacious alternatives to the use of dogs should be explored before using dogs, that the research should clearly necessitate the use of dogs, and that standards of humane care and treatment of such dogs should be scrupulously observed The AKC encourages and strongly supports the interaction and mutual enjoyment of owners and dogs in sporting activities such as hunting and field trials; in working circumstances such as herding, tracking, and pulling; and in competition events such as dog shows, obedience trials, agility trials, and other performance events and tests. The AKC believes that dogs should be properly cared for, humanely trained, and not pushed beyond reasonable limits for which they were bred.

The Church: teaches us that animals and plants are to be utilized for the common good of humanity, animals should be used for food, clothing, to help humans in work and leisure,

and also for medical or scientific experiments that contribute for the care or saving of human life. The church advocates respect, and care for animals, and also warns that you should not direct more affection to animals than to human beings. 

Catechism of the Catholic Church:  2415 The seventh commandment enjoins respect for the integrity of creation.  Animals, like plants and inanimate beings,  are by nature destined for the common good of past, present, and future humanity.  Use of the mineral, vegetable, and animal resources of the universe cannot be divorced from respect for moral imperatives. Man's dominion over inanimate and other living beings granted by the Creator is not absolute; it is limited by concern for the quality of life of his neighbor, including generations to come; it requires a religious respect for the integrity of creation

2416 Animals are God's creatures, he surrounds them with his providential care. By their mere existence they bless him and give him glory. Thus men owe them kindness. We should recall the gentleness with which saints like St. Francis of Assisi or St. Philip Neri treated animals.   2417 God entrusted animals to the stewardship of those whom he created in his own image. Hence it is legitimate to use animals for food and clothing. They may be domesticated to help man in his work and leisure. Medical and scientific experimentation on animals is a morally acceptable practice if it remains within reasonable limits and contributes to caring for or saving of human lives, with which saints like St. Francis of Assisi or St. Philip Neri treated animals

2418 It is contrary to human dignity to cause animals to suffer or die needlessly. It is likewise unworthy to spend money on them that should as a priority go to the relief of human misery. One can love animals; one should not direct to them the affection due only to persons

NAIA Trust (National Animal Interest Alliance): their mission statement is to promote the welfare of animals, strengthen the human-animal bond and safeguard the rights of responsible animal owners, enthusiasts and professionals through education, legislation and the courts. The psychological and medical value of close contact with animals has been well established, in an age when few people work directly with animals or have the opportunity to enjoy nature, the importance of having pets in our lives is greater than ever. NAIA supports reasonable animal welfare laws and animal control ordinances that protect animals and the rights of all citizens without interfering with the rights of responsible pet owners. The NAIA Trust opposes arbitrary limit laws, breed-specific bans or restrictions, mandatory sterilization laws, breeding permits, exorbitant license fees, efforts to dilute the rights and responsibilities of pet ownership by substituting "guardian" for "owner" in animal laws, and blanket prohibitions on "exotic" pets. NAIA  believes that the best way to prevent pet-related nuisances is to encourages communities to use the expertise of animal experts in local animal-related clubs and businesses when writing and reviewing animal control laws

Fewer dogs are entering shelters every year, and shelter deaths are down and continuing to drop. This decline is due to the tireless efforts of shelter employees, responsible dog breeders and rescue volunteers. Nationwide studies indicate that in the last thirty years shelter intakes and euthanasias have decreased by 75-90% or more,  particularly in cities on the east and west coasts.  One of the consequences of the decline, is in the number of shelter dogs that are available for adoption.  In order to deal with this, shelters and rescue groups have had to realign their efforts by importing stray dogs across state lines and from foreign countries, some shelters are misapplying the ‘no-kill shelter’ principles by adopting out unhealthy and bad-tempered dogs. While these practices might be well motivated, it creates significant problems for the public. ie they sustain rather than solve the "overpopulation" issue; they effect an end run around responsible breeders; they open a door to potentially devastating diseases and parasites which are not currently found in our country; and harm a future in which the supply of healthy, well-bred dogs and cats will be limited

Using their terminology:

 "Where did the term “pet” come from?  Have the words "companion animal”  referenced your breedings? Has it ever occurred to you that you are unconsciously spreading their message?  Don't use the word "pet" -  choose  "companion animal"  each time we use "their terminology”  in place of our own, we spread  “their message and support their cause”  Are you telling people: that you "place your  puppies in their new adoptive homes”   “with their new guardians”    Is the check you receive for the puppy considered an "adoption fee for their new furkid "   In the normal world,  the evaluation of your competence is not determined by how INfrequently you do something.  But this logic was served to us by the Animal Rights Activists,  and we actually bought it!  The most harmful way in which we’ve supported their cause (ending animal ownership and  breeding)  is by believing that responsible/good breeders produce less dogs than irresponsible/bad ones. The rationale used by the Activists, in order to get us to believe and strive to be a more responsible breeder was: we were told that there is a ‘pet overpopulation problem’ and every year, more and more unwanted pets are euthanized in shelters.  So, the less dogs you breed, the better a breeder you are……
Do you agree?

v      The less dogs you breed, the better a breeder you are?

v      The fewer books you write, the better a writer you are?

v      The less paintings you produce the better a painter you are?

v      The less cases you try, the better an attorney you are?

v      The less surgeries you perform, the better surgeon you are? Would you choose a cardiac surgeon because he only performs that particular surgery once every four years?

Fact is: A good breeder is not one who breeds less dogs - it is someone who breeds dogs well.  A good breeder is one who breeds only for the improvement in type and structure, as defined by the Standard for his breed.  He screens his dogs for all the health problems,  and makes intelligent and informed choices based on the results of those tests to minimize the risk of producing unhealthy animals.  He takes the time to learn the basics of genetics, anatomy, and canine behavior before he starts breeding,  and continues to study throughout his years as a breeder.  He socializes his puppies.  He stands behind his dogs.  He shows his dogs in competitions, because he understands that the purpose of competition is to evaluate the breeding stock.

Dog breeders know that a good dog comes from a good foundation and that a good dog handler/owner relationship is a result of good genetics…..

We, as German Shepherd breeders, owners, trainers must support animal welfare, be informed and ready to discuss the differences between Rights and Welfare, inform the public on the subject of breeding for a purpose, titled dogs, maintaining temperament and working ability