Dallas Ordinance Will Destroy Hobby
Dog Breeding, Trample Constitution
Radical Animal Rights Agenda Infiltrates Metro Area Government
by JOHN YATES
The American Sporting Dog Alliance
_http://www.americansportingdogalliance.org_
(http://www.americansportingdogalliance.org)
DALLAS, TX – Texas may seem like the most unlikely of places for animal
rights groups to infiltrate and take over local government. This state has the
reputation for vigorous defense of property rights and the traditional
relationships between animals and people.
However, the entire Dallas metropolitan areas has become a case study of how
this can happen in the absence of vigilance, and how dog owners can pay a
devastatingly high price when it does.
The City of Dallas is facing a series of animal control ordinances that will
strip dog owners of all property rights to their animals, eliminate private
breeding of purebred dogs, subject dog owners to unconstitutional searches
and seizures and, in fact, impose the full animal rights dream agenda of the
radical People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) and the only
slightly less radical Humane Society of the United States (HSUS).
People who are closely affiliated with PETA and HSUS have, quite literally,
taken over both city and metro advisory councils. These extremists not only
have written the ordinances, but they also will enforce them.
Dog owners in the City of Dallas face a city council vote on the ordinances,
possibly within days, and every municipality within the metro area faces
similar ordinances because of the actions and influence of the quasi-official
Metroplex Animal Coalition, which is dominated by HSUS and PETA members and
supporters, an investigation by The American Sporting Dog Alliance shows. No
known representatives of dog owners groups or kennel clubs are listed as members
of either the Metroplex or City of Dallas boards.
This group also has exported it’s agenda to other cities, such as Houston,
where the animal control program now is administered by a former Dallas animal
control board President, Kent Robertson, who has worked closely with HSUS
and conducted training seminars for the radical group. In 2002, Robertson
brought in a team of six officials from the HSUS national office to review Dallas
animal control programs and make recommendations.
Robertson barely let the ink dry on his contract before he convinced city
council to institute restrictive breeders licenses in Houston last year. The
Associated Press reported that no one had applied for the required breeders’
permits three months after the ordinance took effect, and thus were running the
risk of fines of up to $2,000 a day.
This time, Dallas dog owners are in the crosshairs and animal rights groups
have won the support of Mayor Tom Leppert, Mayor Pro Tem Dr. Elba Garcia, and
several members of City Council, according to a report of a closed-door “
briefing” between animal activists and city officials by Metroplex Animal
Coalition President Elaine Munch.
Munch is closely aligned with HSUS. In a description about how the Metroplex
Complex was formed, she wrote: “We asked our regional office of HSUS and
other national groups for help in identifying those to invite.”
Also, HSUS representative Lou Guyton is a member of the Metroplex Coalition
Advisory Board, as is long-time PETA ally and award winner Robert “Skip”
Trimble, an animal rights attorney who also is president of the City of Dallas
Animal Shelter Commission, chairman of the board of the PETA-like Texas Humane
Legislative Network and a director of the radical fringe Animal Legal
Defense Fund.
Another member of both the Dallas and Metroplex boards is Jonnie England,
who was drafted recently by HSUS to judge that organization’s annual “Pets For
Life” award.
Munch quoted Mayor Leppert as telling people at the briefing that he has a “
sense of urgency” to pass the ordinances in 30-to-45 days. Councilwoman
Pauline Medrana was quoted as calling the ordinances “fair, firm and comprehensive,
” and Council Members Dave Neumann, Mitchell Rasansky and Ron Natinsky
reportedly expressed their support.
“Almost all council members stressed being aggressive in getting the
ordinances ready ASAP/with a sense of urgency,” Munch wrote of the briefing. “(…The
ordinances) were received very well with no council members showing any
opposition to these proposed
ordinances.”

Trimble and Munch are key players in the animal rights takeover of the
Dallas Metroplex. Both hold leadership positions on both the City and metro
advisory boards, and both have close ties to radical animal rights groups that
oppose the private ownership of animals.
PETA awarded Trimble its 2001 “Activist Award” for his work on Texas animal
rights issues, and he also was honored by HSUS in 1997 with a “Legislative
Achievement Award” and by a New Mexico group in 2000 for “lifelong commitment
to animal rights.”
In a published article, Trimble described himself as a former “animal abuser,
” and his description says a lot about what he now thinks is abuse. “I’m a
former animal abuser,” Trimble says. “I used to own racehorses, raise roping
steers, hunt and eat meat.”
Now, Trimble describes himself as a vegan vegetarian, deplores traditional
farming and ranching, and echoes the animal rights agenda of opposition to
breeding animals, hunting, rodeos and competing with horses.
The American Sporting Dog Alliance believes that only a handful of Dallas
residents would agree with Trimble’s idea of animal abuse, and that a large
majority would describe his views as radical fringe - if not fruitcake fringe!
We urge City Council to reject these views and uphold the values and beliefs of
the large majority of Dallas residents. No state has fought harder than
Texas to protect the rights of individuals from unwarranted intrusion by
government, beginning with the Alamo and continuing into the modern era.
As an attorney, Trimble has developed a specialty of using the law as a tool
to advance the animal rights agenda, and is credited with playing the major
role and banning the slaughter of horses in Texas. In one case, his work
bolstered PETA in shutting down a Texas primate sanctuary. Trimble was with the
police on the raid, and the effort received direct praise from PETA President
Ingrid Newkirk on the organization’s website. Trimble also is capitalizing on
the Michael Vicks dog fighting scandal, and has been quoted as saying that it
is a major problem in Dallas. Dog fighting is a major animal rights battle
cry that HSUS is using as a false justification for new laws against dog
owners, almost none of whom have ever been involved with this crime in any way.
Munch has close ties to HSUS through the Metroplex and city animal control
boards. HSUS has nothing to do with local Humane Societies, which help animals.
Instead, HSUS is a national political action and lobbying group for animal
rights issues.
Wayne Pacelle, the head of HSUS, has been quoted extensively about his
radical views on animal rights that oppose eating meat, pet ownership and hunting.
He wrote: “We have no ethical obligation to preserve the different breeds of
livestock produced through selective breeding ...One generation and out. We
have no problems with the extinction of domestic animals. They are creations
of human selective breeding.”
Pacelle also said, “I don’t have a hands-on fondness for animals…To this
day I don’t feel bonded to any non-human animal. I like them and I pet them and
I’m kind to them, but there’s no special bond between me and other animals…
In fact, I don’t want to see another dog or cat born.”
The Metroplex board also is endorsed by a wide range of animal rights
groups, including the radical Animal Connection of Texas and a Buddhist group
called Ahimsa. Both of these groups advocate vegan vegetarianism.
Trimble also works to end the breeding of dogs through his leadership role
in the Texas Humane Legislation Network.
On its website, Trimble’s group attacks dog breeders: “Do not buy from
breeders. No matter how caring they appear to be about the animals they are
selling, they are still contributing to the overpopulation crisis. At least 25
percent of dogs entering shelters are full-bred dogs.”
Another quote: " ‘Don't breed or buy while animals in shelters die’ is a
bumper sticker slogan worth taking to heart.”
What’s The Problem?
Proposed solutions such as the Dallas animal ordinance presume that there is
a problem to solve.
City officials have been quoted extensively as saying that Dallas has a
severe problem with “pet overpopulation.” What does that mean?
"We have to do something,” Acting Shelter Director Willie McDaniel said. He
described an epidemic of stray dogs running loose in low-income
neighborhoods, and also complaints by people who don’t like their neighbors’ dogs.
McDaniel then went on to bemoan the fact that Dallas’ free spay and neuter
program isn’t working, and that tougher laws are needed to force people to
sterilize their pets.
The answer, in the eyes of McDaniel, is to eliminate the private breeding of
dogs that are owned by the people who do not cause the problems. People who
breed dogs for show, hunting or competition are very selective, do not allow
indiscriminate matings, and confine their dogs so that they cannot get bred
accidentally.
Several newspaper articles say that Dallas has very poor compliance with
required dog licensing rules, and Animal Control almost never prosecutes people
who violate a strict “leash law” by allowing their pets to run loose. It
also is reported that very little effort has been given to promote the free spay
and neuter clinics.
Thus, it would appear that City Council has done little to try to solve the
problem by means that are available now, are pressing for new laws when they
refuse to enforce the current ones, and are targeting the wrong people with
the new laws. In doing so, they have been led by the nose into embracing the
animal rights groups’ agenda to take a giant leap toward eliminating
responsible breeding and private ownership of all animals.
Shelter statistics for Dallas are hard to find, as they are combined with
Plano and Fort Worth in data published by the state.
A Dallas Morning News Article from 2006 said 28,686 dogs and cats were
impounded in 2004. The article did not separate dogs from cats in the data. In
1994, 10 years earlier, 38,294 dogs and cats reportedly were impounded.
Those figures indicate that there has been a 25-percent improvement in the
situation during that 10-year-long period.
The improvement continues at an even more rapid rate. The most recent
statistics show that 26,979 dogs and cats entered the city shelter in FY 2006-07.
That is a 6-percent reduction in the most recent two years.
Trimble’s legislative advocacy group maintains that 25-percent of the dogs
entering the animal shelter are “full-bred” animals – that is, dogs that
resemble a recognized breed of dog and may or may not be purebreds. That figure
is standard HSUS rhetoric.
What HSUS doesn’t say is that about 20-percent of dogs entering shelters are
brought by their owners specifically for euthanasia because of old age,
severe illness or debilitating injuries. They also don’t say that dogs of the “
pit bull” breeds and crosses comprise between 25-percent and 70-percent of
shelter admissions nationwide, with large cities like Dallas tending to be on
the high end of the scale.
These two categories of dogs account for almost all of the “full-bred” or
purebred dogs entering shelters, nationwide statistics show.
Moreover, national research of the major reasons for pet abandonment rank
too many dogs or puppies sixth and 10th on the list of major causes. The
biggest reasons are social factors, such as landlord issues, moves for job changes
and divorce. Thus, the research shows, any effort toward forced population
control would have a minimal impact on the problem, because most of the
abandoned pets are wanted by their owners.
The Shotgun “Solution”
The animal rights groups are asking City Council to make a logic-defying
leap with the proposed new ordinances.
While there is not one shred of evidence that hobby breeders contribute to
the problem in any significant way, the ordinances target them for the
elimination of activities that are done responsibly, involve hundreds if not
thousands of law-abiding and conscientious Dallas residents, and play a large role
in the city’s economy.

Pets are a multi-million-dollar business in Dallas, and hobby breeders play
a major role in purchasing veterinary services, food for their animals,
supplies, equipment, fencing, building materials, advertising, business services
and sporting goods at hundreds of businesses in the city. Hundreds of jobs are
directly and indirectly at risk from these ordinances.
Here is how the ordinance targets those innocent and responsible people who
also are the geese that lay a golden egg for Dallas’ economy:
A person or family would be prohibited from keeping more than six dogs,
cats, or a combination of dogs and cats.
All dogs and cats must be spayed or neutered at four months of age, or the
owner will face confiscation of the animal and fines of up to $2,000 a day.
This requirement flies in the face of much modern veterinary science research,
and also exposes the city to devastating lawsuits (see below).
This provision would effectively outlaw dog shows and other canine events in
the City of Dallas, because anyone who lives outside of the city would be
subject to citations and stiff fines, and would risk having their dogs
confiscated and subjected to forced sterilization if they are not spayed or neutered.
This would have a major negative economic impact on Dallas businesses.
There are some provisions for obtaining a breeding permit, but McDaniel and
other city officials have been quoted as saying that breeders’ permits will
not be issued in residentially zoned areas, where most people who raise dogs
live. It’s a classic “Catch 22.” People can get a breeder’s permit in
theory, but not in practice.
In the unlikely possibility that someone does not live in a residential
area, breeders’ permits are available at the cost of $500 per year for each dog
or cat, but only if the owner and animal qualify. All other animals must be
spayed or neutered. To qualify, the animal’s owner must be a member of an
approved club for the breed of dog or cat.
Breeders’ permits are available only for dogs that are registered with a
registry that meets the city’s approval. To be approved, the registry must
convince city officials that it “maintains and enforces a code of ethics for dog
and cat breeding that includes restrictions from breeding of dogs and cats
with genetic defects and life threatening health problems that commonly threaten
the breed.” This also is a “Catch 22,” as this would be unenforceable by a
registry in the absence of personal inspections, discussing it with the dog’s
veterinarian, and mandating prohibitively expensive genetic tests (thousands
of dollars for some tests) that are not available for many conditions. No
registry would meet this standard. Thus, no registry could qualify.
Anyone who owns a dog would be subject to unannounced inspections of his or
her home and property by animal control officers to assure compliance with
the ordinance. A search warrant would not be required, and probable cause would
not have to be established. This is in direct violation of protections
contained in the Bill of Rights of the both Texas and U.S. Constitutions.
If anyone is found with a dog that is not spayed or neutered, animal control
officers are empowered to seize and impound the animal. To get the animal
back, an owner would have to either obtain a breeding permit of sterilize the
dog. Dogs that are not reclaimed under this provision become city property,
and can be adopted or euthanized.
Tethering is banned except for short periods, and all kennels used to house
dogs must be a minimum of 150 square feet. That size limitation makes sense
for a large dog, but is absurd for a Chihuahua.
Several other provisions would stringently regulate dangerous dog, animals
used for research, circuses and other performance events. Possession of
certain kinds of animals is prohibited or severely restricted.
Fines of up to $2,000 for each day of noncompliance are provided, with
higher fines for repeat offenders.
It is clear that the intention of the writers of this ordinance has nothing
at all to do with reducing the number of stray dogs in poor neighborhoods of
Dallas. It is a naked attempt to deny people the right to raise and breed
dogs, and clearly is part of the animal rights plan to eliminate dogs from the
lives of people. Sterilize now and, as Wayne Pacelle of HSUS said, “one
generation and out.”
It must be emphasized that hobby breeders play a vital role in helping
people to obtain companion animals that will be an intergal part of their family
for more than a decade. Dedicated hobby breeders work hard to improve
temperament, genetic health, beauty and utility in the various breeds of dogs, and
offer an important alternative to shelter and rescue dogs whose health
background, history, disposition and genetic backgrounds are unknown.
Hobby breeders do not contribute to the problem. Indeed, they are the most
important element in the solution. In this regard, too, the proposed Dallas
ordinances are wholly counterproductive. Hobby breeders and other people who
own purebred dogs are not responsible for people who allow mixed-breed dogs to
roam the streets and breed indiscriminately. There is utterly no
justification for restricting or eliminating hobby breeding. Indeed, there are many
excellent and proven reasons why it should be strongly encouraged!
But Lawyers Will Love It
If City Council approves these ordinance revisions, one thing is certain.
The City of Dallas will become embroiled in a nonstop series of lawsuits by dog
owners who can claim damages if their pet is diagnosed with one of the many
serious and sometimes fatal medical conditions that have been linked by
recent research to spaying and neutering, especially at a young age.
They also will have to face legal challenges based on the Texas property
law, and for violations of due process and search and seizure protections
enshrined in the Texas and U.S. Constitutions.
The American Veterinary Medical Association has long advocated spaying and
neutering of dogs, and continues to do so, under the belief that the benefits
outweigh the risks. However, recent research has led many individual
veterinarians to seriously question this premise, and a majority of the most recent
research indicates that there are substantial risks involved with
sterilization. This has the strong potential to become a major liability issue for City
of Dallas taxpayers.
A 2007 analysis of the research by Dr. Larry Katz of Rutgers University
concluded:

The Bill of Rights in the Texas Constitution clearly states: “The people
shall be secure in their persons, houses, papers and possessions, from all
unreasonable seizures or searches…,” and that a warrant shall be required in all
cases. To obtain a warrant, probable cause of a legal violation must be shown.
The Bill of Rights also is equally clear that people must be properly
compensated if any level of government seizes or destroys their property for any
reason: “No person's property shall be taken, damaged or destroyed for or
applied to public use without adequate compensation being made…”
Thus, under the Bill of Rights, it would appear that the City of Dallas
would be required to compensate a dog owner for the fair market value of any dog
that is seized or destroyed, as dogs are considered to be personal property
under Texas law.
This issue of taking may extend farther, as a mandate to spay and neuter
also would be a taking of the value of the property, since a dog could not be
used to provide valuable stud services or raise valuable puppies. Simply put, a
spayed or neutered dog is not worth as much money as a dog that is intact.
The city thus would be taking the value of this dog, and would be required by
law to provide the owner with fair compensation.
Lawyers truly would love this ordinance, all the way to the bank
Please Help Dallas Dog Owners
The American Sporting Dog Alliance is urging all of our members and
supporters to offer assistance to Dallas dog owners in this vital fight to preserve
their fundamental rights.
The proposed ordinances are slated to be discussed at a meeting of City
Council’s Quality of Life Committee on Monday, April 28. The announcement did not
state the time or place of this meeting, or if the public will be allowed to
attend or participate. Trimble’s Texas Humane Legislation Network, a radical
animal rights group, prepared and distributed the official announcement.
The American Sporting Dog Alliance urges all Dallas residents to contact
City Council members (contact information is given below) prior to this meeting.
We are supporting the efforts of two Texas groups to fight these proposed
ordinances: The Responsible Pet Owners’ Alliance
(_www.responsiblepetowners.org_ (http://www.responsiblepetowners.org) ) and The Texas Kennel Club (contact
Nancy Wright at _OrielPWCs@verizon.net_ (rielPWCs@verizon.net">mailtorielPWCs@verizon.net) ).
Dog owners have retained an attorney, Zandra Anderson, to represent them
before City Council. Residents of Dallas should forward information to Ms.
Wright or The American Sporting Dog Alliance, to be passed along to the attorney.
She needs to know that you are a resident of Dallas, your profession, the
kinds of dogs that you own, and the events in which you participate. This
information will be submitted to City Council.
The American Sporting Dog Alliance also urges dog owners who do not live in
Dallas to offer their support to dog owners in that city. Please contact Ms.
Wright and let her know how you can help, or contact us at _asda@csonline.net_
(mailto:asda@csonline.net) , and we’ll pass on your information to the
appropriate people.
We strongly suggest letters of protest to the Dallas Morning News as a
letter to the editor, and also to each member of Dallas City Council. The American
Sporting Dog Alliance has written to all of them, but it is vital that
citizens respond vocally, too.
Here are their email addresses:
Dallas Morning News
Letters to the Editor _bmong@dallasnews.com_ (mailto:bmong@dallasnews.com)
City of Dallas
1500 Marilla Street
Dallas, Texas 75201
Mayor Tom Leppert
Phone: (214) 670-4054
Fax: (214) 670-0646
_Tom.leppert@dallascityhall.com_ (mailto:Tom.leppert@dallascityhall.com)
City Manager Mary Suhm
Phone: (214) 670-3296
Fax: (214) 670-3946
_Mary.Suhm@dallascityhall.com_ (mailto:Mary.Suhm@dallascityhall.com)
Asst. City Manager David Brown
(supervises Animal Services)
Phone: (214) 670-3390
Fax: (214) 670-4965
_David.brown@dallascityhall.com_ (avid.brown@dallascityhall.com">mailto: David.brown@dallascityhall.com)
Mayor Pro Tem Dr. Elba Garcia
Phone: (214) 670-4052
Fax: (214) 670-3409
_Elba.garcia@dallascityhall.com_ (mailto:Elba.garcia@dallascityhall.com)
Councilmember Pauline Medrano
Chairman: Quality of Life Committee
Phone: (214) 670-4048
Fax: (214) 670-5117
_Pauline.medrano@dallascityhall.com_
(auline.medrano@dallascityhall.com">mailtoauline.medrano@dallascityhall.com)
Deputy Mayor Pro Tem Dwaine Caraway
Phone: (214) 670-0781
Fax: (214) 670-3409
_Dwaine.caraway@dallascityhall.com_
(waine.caraway@dallascityhall.com">mailto: Dwaine.caraway@dallascityhall.com)
Councilmember David Neumann
Member: Quality of Life Committee
Phone: (214) 670-0776
Fax: (214) 670-1833
_David.neumann@dallascityhall.com_ (avid.neumann@dallascityhall.com">mailto: David.neumann@dallascityhall.com)
Councilmember Vonciel Jones Hill
Vice-Chair: Quality of Life Committee
Phone: (214) 670-0777
Fax: (214) 670-5117
_Vonciel.hill@dallascityhall.com_ (mailto:Vonciel.hill@dallascityhall.com)
Councilmember Steve Salazar
Member: Quality of Life Committee
Phone: (214) 670-4199
Fax: (214) 670-5115
_Steven.salazar@dallascityhall.com_
(mailto:Steven.salazar@dallascityhall.com)
Councilmember Carolyn Davis
Quality of Life Committee
Phone: (214) 670-4689
Fax: (214) 670-5115
_Carolyn.davis@dallascityhall.com_ (mailto:Carolyn.davis@dallascityhall.com)
Councilmember Tennell Atkins
Phone: (214) 670-4066
Fax: (214) 670-5115
_Tennell.atkins@dallascityhall.com_
(mailto:Tennell.atkins@dallascityhall.com)
Councilmember Sheffield Kadane
Quality of Life Committee
Phone: (214) 670-4069
Fax: (214) 670-5115
_sheffield.kadane@dallascityhall.com_
(mailto:sheffield.kadane@dallascityhall.com)
Councilmember Jerry Allen
Phone: (214) 670-4068
Fax: (214) 670-5115
_Jerry.allen@dallascityhall.com_ (mailto:Jerry.allen@dallascityhall.com)
Councilmember Linda Koop
Phone: (214) 670-7817
Fax: (214) 670-5117
_Debra.brown@dallascityhall.com_ (ebra.brown@dallascityhall.com">mailto: Debra.brown@dallascityhall.com)
Councilmember Ron Natinsky
Phone: (214) 670-4067
Fax: (214) 670-5117
_District12@dallascityhall.com_ (istrict12@dallascityhall.com">mailto: District12@dallascityhall.com)
Councilmember Mitchell Rasansky
Phone: (214) 670-3816
Fax: (214) 670-5117
_Mitchell.rasansky@dallascityhall.com_
(mailto:Mitchell.rasansky@dallascityhall.com)
Councilmember Angela Hunt
Phone: (214) 670-5415
Fax: (214) 670-5117
_Angela.hunt@dallascityhall.com_ (mailto:Angela.hunt@dallascityhall.com)
The American Sporting Dog Alliance represents owners, hobby breeders and
professionals who work with breeds of dogs that are used for hunting. We are a
grassroots movement working to protect the rights of dog owners, and to assure
that the traditional relationships between dogs and humans maintains its
rightful place in American society and life. Please visit us on the web at
_http://www.americansportingdogalliance.org_
(http://www.americansportingdogalliance.org) .
The American Sporting Dog Alliance also needs your help so that we can
continue to work to protect the rights of dog owners. Your membership,
participation and support are truly essential to the success of our mission. We are
funded solely by the donations of our members, and maintain strict independence.
PLEASE CROSS-POST THIS REPORT AND FORWARD IT TO YOUR FRIENDS