Web Search powered by YAHOO! SEARCH
share
email
font size
options
 
Tuesday, November 10, 2009

A few weeks ago, just after the new state dog law went into effect, Pennsylvania dog breeder Marcus Lantz made what he said was a simple business decision.

He could not meet the larger cage-size requirements under the law, so he called his veterinarian and asked him to come to his farm west of Harrisburg to euthanize nine dogs. One was a nine-year-old St. Bernard and the rest were 4-to-6-year-old “lap dog” breeds among them, Bichons and Coton de Tulear – whose puppies bring top dollar at pet stores.

“Today eight retired breeders are scheduled to die because my cages are now too small,” Lantz wrote in a letter to the state Independent Regulatory Review Board, which is considering additional standards of care for commercial kennels.
“How do I answer my small children’s questions when they see the dead dogs?” he continued. “Example, Sherry and Charlotte don’t have enough room anymore, so Charlotte must die so Sherry can have more room.”

The words were chilling. Why did Lantz destroy his dogs rather than comply with the law designed to improve conditions in commercial breeding facilities, otherwise known as “puppy mills?”

The primary provisions of the law require commercial breeders (defined as those selling 60 or more dogs a year or anyone selling a single dog to a pet store) to double the cage size and eliminate wire flooring and cage stacking. The law – which went into effect on Oct. 9 - also requires regular veterinary care for breeding dogs and outdoor exercise.

In addition, breeders are no longer allowed to shoot their dogs. (That measure was inserted in the bill after the August 2008 incident where a Berks County breeder slaughtered 80 dogs rather than treat them for flea infestation.)

For years breeders and their representatives have vehemently opposed all attempts to enact tougher kennel standards, arguing that most Pennsylvania kennels are clean and that a “few bad apples” have brought on this undeserved reputation. Inspection reports, court dockets and the rising number of kennel revocations would suggest there are more than a few bad apples.

The Professional Dog Breeders Association and the American Canine Association – the primary breed registry for commercial kennels - have refused multiple requests over the past three years to take this reporter to a commercial breeding facility.

Lantz said he would show me his kennel as long as I didn’t take pictures. I agreed and he took me inside the two small cinder block buildings. It was stark but clean. Wire cages lined each side, containing his remaining 31 breeding dogs – Bichons, Coton de Tulear, Yorkshire Terriers, Daschunds. Puppies are born and spend the first weeks of their lives in barren wood boxes attached to a small wire enclosure. Three females and their puppies were housed in those whelping, or birthing boxes, in the center of the back room.

One box was so small that a Jack Russell/beagle-mix female had only a few inches of head room. Lantz said he realized it was too small and that he planned to build larger boxes after determining with dog wardens what was required under the new law.

The space was illuminated by a large, high-tech skylight. The dogs’ waste passes through the wire in the bottom of the cages into a trough that Lantz hoses out with water and bleach. A large fan set at the rear of the rectangular building pushes air through the center of the kennel. Water is delivered through an over head drip system and feed bowls were scrubbed.

Space heaters and lights are powered by propane. Lantz is Amish and uses no electricity in his house.

Lantz said he spent more than $10,000 to modernize his kennel and now the state is ordering him to remove cages put in new flooring (the wire is illegal) and expand his kennel again to accommodate outdoor exercise. He showed me the dismantled chain link pens where his three St. Bernard dogs had lived.

“There wasn’t going to be enough room,” he said.

The dogs were clipped and appeared to have no visible health problems or injuries. But they are rarely handled and most never experience life outside the kennel. One Coton – a small, white, fluffy dog - cowered in corner of her cage. Others frantically jumped against the sides of their cages. There was no bedding. No toys. No view to the outside. Their world is contained within the cinder block walls.

Asked whether his dogs ever get outdoor exercise, Lantz said some of the favored dogs were, on occasion, taken outside by his children.

“They’re not treated as pets,” he said.

The Independent Regulatory Review Board is currently considering the new requirements on commercial kennels proposed by the Canine Health Board – a nine-member body made up of veterinarians appointed by the four legislative caucuses, the Pennsylvania Veterinary Medical Association (PVMA) and University of Pennsylvania Veterinary School.

The board was charged under the dog law with establishing adequate flooring, lighting and ventilation requirements for large kennels.

Now those proposals are facing widespread opposition from the same groups who fought the dog law last year: the PVMA, the Pennsylvania Farm Bureau, the Pet Industry Joint Advisory Council, which represents pet stores, the Sportsmen’s Alliance, Republican members of the House Agriculture Committee and Sen. Michael Brubaker – chairman of the Senate Agriculture Committee - whose committee created the board to appease the aforementioned groups in 2008.

Lantz said he has applied for a waiver that would give him up to three more years to make the required upgrades to his kennel, but he has not yet received a response from the Department of Agriculture. (A spokesman said today that 48 waiver applications are pending.) Lantz said he wants to comply with the new law, but needs more time because he has not paid off loan for the improvements two years ago.

“It’s politics,” said Lantz of the proposed regulations and the stepped up enforcement of the dog law. “They want to get rid of dog breeders; they don’t care about the welfare of dogs.”

So, why did Lantz feel he had no choice but to destroy Charlotte and the other dogs in his kennel?

In his letter to the state regulatory board, Lantz wrote that although he was urged by dog wardens to surrender his unwanted dogs to a humane society, he said he didn’t want people to “teach tricks on them” or “housetrain them.”

Lantz elaborated during my visit, telling me that he’d heard humane societies were overcrowded and that he was concerned his dogs would be adopted to people who would keep them on “four-foot chains.”

“I’d rather see them euthanized,” he said. “I couldn’t bring myself to adopt them out.”

 

Posted by Amy Worden @ 8:55 AM  Permalink | 30 comments
Comments   
Posted 10:44 AM, 11/10/2009
McGruff
"Cinder block walls," "No outdoor exercise yard," "no view to the outside," "few inches of head room," "soon to be injected with a lethal injection." I thought this was a story about death row! Well actually it is. All of these commercial breeding kennels are death rows. The breeding stock are automatically destroyed at commercial kennels when they have out lived their breeding productivity which is usually 5 - 6 years of age. Charlotte is merely one of thousands that are systematically executed every year at PA kennels. Charlotte was not a victim of the new regulations but rather a victim of uncaring greedy puppy millers. I hope the members of the IRRC are smart enough to realize this.
Posted 02:08 PM, 11/10/2009
Shelterviewer
It is sad and unfortunate that this Breeder feels that it was not possible for him to turn the animals over to a Humane Society. I don't know how much there was a religious overtone as that being "their way" and he didn't want to subject his dogs to "our way", but I suppose that is something that will be a problem for years to come. I can say that Humane Societies would not adopt out to the people he mentions, and just wish that he would have seen that. Bryan Langlois, DVM
Posted 07:39 PM, 11/10/2009
beauthunder
I hope they never give him an extension and I do not feel sorry for this "so called Man". I hope he rots in hell for the abuse that he inflicts on helpless animals every day. Let him get a real job like the rest of us to support his kids !!!!!! His comments make me ill.
Posted 07:39 PM, 11/10/2009
beauthunder
I hope they never give him an extension and I do not feel sorry for this "so called Man". I hope he rots in hell for the abuse that he inflicts on helpless animals every day. Let him get a real job like the rest of us to support his kids !!!!!! His comments make me ill.
Posted 10:05 PM, 11/10/2009
RE-Joyce
When Lantz' comments arrived at the Bureau of Dog Law Enforcement (which inspects PA's kennels and enforces the dog laws), did Special Secretary Jessie Smith or Director Sue West send a warden out to his property to verify whether or not the dogs were euthanized legally? No, once again it is left to a reporter to do what should come naturally to the Bureau of Dog Law. I'm sure the Inquirer was out there the next day. Instead of investigating Lantz' claims, the Bureau was busy trying to create an amnesty program to protect the puppy millers. THEY HAVE HAD FORTY YEARS OF AMNESTY - time to crack some heads together! These Amish breeders are savages.
Posted 10:06 PM, 11/10/2009
RE-Joyce
Great comment from Dr. Lang-a-lu - considering he's one of the bad guys stalling our new dog laws!!!!!!
Posted 11:49 PM, 11/10/2009
Lets Be Real
It always amazes me that people that swear they are the greatest lovers of everything living on the planet use phrases like " rot in hell ", savages,ect when it is humans. Have we forgotten that our fellow man/women is also an animal that deserves compassion and understanding? Why when a shelter kills 25-90% of the animals in their care because they say they need more space or money ( Peta set a record at 90% kill rate last year ) is it accepted and this man is a savage.The USHS reportedly spent 4 cents of every dollar donated on animals in their care last year, that's 1.8 million dollars of the 400 million that was collected? The shelter in Philly was paid over 3 million last year to care for animals, less than $600,000 was actually used for this purpose. As far as " Get a real job " why is running a shelter, being a Vet, grooming dogs, working at Pet Smart, working for Dog Law,ect real work but cleaning, feeding and providing for your dogs every need not a "real job" or a worth while thing to do with your life? Who speaks for me and my canine children; who is lining up to give us money so we can even survive? You will never see a million dollar commercial or billboards like the USHS or PETA use for the rights of my dogs but if you did I think they would ask you to just allow them to have children and grow old happily with the canines and humans they share their lives with everyday. Most people never get to see the magic of a canine great great grandparent playing with or nurturing their children and if you continue to mindlessly follow the disinformation of the " animal rights activist / terrorist " none of us ever will again. If you want dogs to be people then ask yourself this question: If your dog was your child would you give them or your money to people that will sterilize 100 % of them and kill 25-90% of them within the next year? If this is Love or " the answer " then I fear all is lost.
Posted 01:18 AM, 11/11/2009
CanineFan
Too bad that thousands of PA-HSUS members won't have an opportunity to submit THEIR comments to the IRRC about the Canine Health Board's proposed regs. Seems state director Sarah Speed made a deal with the PA Bureau of Dog Law's Jessie Smith to keep this information from the HSUS membership. Read her letter here: http://tinyurl.com/ydjnteh Wonder what the Bureau promised HSUS in exchange for not sending in letters in support of regulations that would help the breeder dogs?
Posted 01:23 AM, 11/11/2009
Lets Be Real
One more question; why are we allowed to slur and profile people as Amish or breeders of any number of dogs as ( puppy mills ) with impunity? We can't do this based on race, sex, age, sexual preference, or religion last time I checked in the USA. I guess the reason we feel safe is that the Amish don't believe in litigation and the breeders don't have anyone competent or rich enough to put up a good fight yet. FYI I not Amish; I believe in a higher power but have not been in church for 25 years. I also believe very strongly that my dogs are a girt from that higher power that deserve the right to exist and not be exterminated by activist and politicians. The breed I have has almost been exterminated in their county of origin because the current government doesn't like their connection to the last group that was in political control. Ironically trying to take a dog from the country before the 1950's was a death sentence for the human. Now we sterilize / exterminate the breed for the greater good of our individual needs. Let me close in saying that I am not trying to slur or profile animal activist / terrorist or politicians. I respect your rights to exist and your beliefs and I ask that you do the same for me. Go save the rats, flies, polar bears, non-smokers, people that hate Christmas, a bacteria somewhere, a mold spore, make us wear seat belts or helmets; please just don't exterminate my wonderful dogs by political process and greed.
Posted 01:36 AM, 11/11/2009
CanineFan
Oh, and I supposed Dr. Lang-a-lu would also like breeders to surrender dogs via the "Safe Harbor" program that allows breeders to circumvent the law by not being prosecuted when the dogs are found to be sick, abused or neglected. "Safe Harbor" was created to keep rescuers from reporting what is REALLY going on in commercial kennels to protect dog wardens who NEVER do their jobs and NEVER call in humane officers to prosecute these animal abusers. Between preventing advocates from sending in letters of support of the Canine Health Board proposed regs and hiding dogs that are found in deplorable condition, one must wonder what the heck is going on at the Bureau of Dog Law and why Jessie Smith continues to suck up to the professional pet breeders.
Posted 02:43 AM, 11/11/2009
Lets Be Real
Hey CanineFan lets hear you blast the true lover of dogs like me that is proud that our family has bred our dogs for thirty years in our home, like you do on Pa dog law. Do you have a dog? Have they ever had long toenails, lost a tooth, needed a haircut or looked older because they were getting older ( I guess in a shelter they never reach 150-200 years old in human years)? This is the impossible, subjective standard you would like to enforce. Why do humane officers want to carry guns ( although they assure us it is to only shoot people ). Thanks; if you need a gun please bring police officers that I hope are trained not to shoot people unless necessary. You can't shoot a dog regardless thanks to Pa Dog Law; can we do the same for the family of four that happens to be human when you try to steal their canine life companion. I read the articles that most people that resist animal cruelty officers own a gun and may have cash; last time I checked the right to bear arms and have money is still allowed in the USA. Shelters need Pa Dog Law to look bad to take control which leads to lots of profit. In the old days if you rode up to a herd of cattle and decided that they needed better care and therefore sold them to someone else they called it cattle rustling. When you get a puppy from a breeder the stork or rustler has not just dropped it on your doorstep for profit or destruction.
Posted 05:29 AM, 11/11/2009
CanineFan
Actually, Lets (and I think you mean Let's) Be Real, I own 2 rescues and one is from an Amish mill that came to me with a broken jaw, a hernia of the diaphram that required surgery and bronchial pneumonia AT 8 WEEKS OF AGE and weighed less than 2 pounds... he was being starved to death. The other is from such a wonderful backyard breeder who chose to breed a female she KNEW would produce liver problems for her pups and he also underwent extensive surgery to correct a liver shunt birth defect. My previous dog lived to over 100 years (in dog years) and was a mill rescue with very serious back issues - 5+ herniated discs in her back. I've seen firsthand what the mills of Lancaster County produce and it's not my fault that the majority of PA commercial breeders are Amish or Mennonite. If you think you do such a great job at breeding, I'd think you'd want the folks in Lancaster to clean up their acts oh, and any time you want to venture into North Phila to a investigate a reported dog fighting ring without any a body armor and protection, I'm sure we can hook you up. Guns aren't exclusive to Phila, either, I believe Sam King in Lancaster was found to have a machine gun on his property. While I can tell that you'd love for someone to argue with you, alas, I don't think that's going to happen in this forum so why don't you take your antagonistic attitude and go pontificate somewhere else. In fact, why don't you have at those who ARE bad breeders and make people like you, supposedly, look bad OR go take a pill. You're boring us all to tears.
Posted 07:21 AM, 11/11/2009
Shelterviewer
Oh Boy....here we go again. For those that are a little off on their facts. The Dog Law already passed. I am in no way stalling anything. How can one stall a law that is already in effect?? Please answer this question for me?? If you are referring to the regulations that are pending before IRRC, well...I'm not stalling those either. The reg process is now in the hands of the Dept of Ag, not the Canine Health Board....so maybe you would like to clarify that. Finally, why don't you RE-JOYCE and CANINEFAN identify who you are. I just find that kind of humorous really. If you are so sure of yourself and you are right in your opinions...why would you have to hide behind a screen name to make your points?? Maybe you could just come out in the open about it...and hey...lets meet sometime to discuss the facts. Bryan Langlois, DVM "These comments are mine and mine alone and do not represent the Humane League of Lancaster County or any other organization"
Posted 11:00 AM, 11/11/2009
scargosun
This is a forum for opinions, no matter how wrong, insane or long winded they may be. Here's the bottom line; breeders who can't follow the rules, find a new profession. Many breeders are good and do their job correctly, caring for their dogs and their offspring so that they are healthy living creatures and the breed lines remain strong. Those that see their animals as a cash crop should be put out of business (and, yes, I also mean factory farming practices but that is another topic). It's like with any job, you don't follow the rules and do your job correctly, you are done. End of story for EVERYONE, not just the Amish.
Posted 09:24 PM, 11/11/2009
watchingover
What is interesting to me in regard to Mr. Lantz's letter and the article Ms Worden wrote is that it sounds just like many animal shelters. Stark block walls, a dog cowering in a corner, euthanasia for space. I also find it interesting many of the posters on this blog have no clue to the facts. How many breeders are out there breeding for something other than profit? Granted, there are some but not many. Many of the "puppy mills" are back yard breeders or hoarders. Indeed, most of the "puppy mills" are English not Amish. What about the Mennonites? If you look at the "facts" the Amish are a drop in the bucket compared to the overall amount of breeders out there. But, the public has to pick on one group I guess. I am not saying there are no problems. There are many. Who is to blame? Everyone. The breeders, for not doing what they were supposed to do, some of the dog wardens for not doing their jobs, the State for not overseeing the wardens in the past and failing to supply the training and manpower needed. It is getting fixed thanks to the public uproar. But is everyone going to be satisfied? Never! No matter what happens their will be posters that will never be pleased. Many of the animal “rights” individuals are using the cause for personal gain, be it financial or power. Sad but true. Many are in it for the right reason. Will this issue every go away? Only when people stop buying puppies. Supply and demand. I learned about that in grade school.
About Amy Worden
Amy Worden is a politics and government reporter for the Inquirer. In that capacity she has explored a range of animal issues from dog kennel law improvements and horse slaughter to the comeback of peregrine falcons and pigeon hunts. From hamsters to horses, animals have always been part of her life. Today Amy lives on an apple orchard near Gettysburg with her husband and a feline menagerie. A search is underway for the right “dawg” and they hope the barnyard will soon house endangered geese and other animals.