HARRISBURG — An admission by state agriculture officials Wednesday that fewer than half the large breeding kennels in Pennsylvania were meeting the full requirements of the 2008 dog law and that the state had decided not to enforce some provisions of the law touched off a series of heated exchanges between officials and animal-welfare advocates.

Officials told members of the governor’s Dog Law Advisory Board — meeting for the first time since Gov. Corbett took office 15 months ago — that only 17 of 52 commercial kennels were in compliance with regulations governing temperature, humidity, ventilation, and ammonia levels that were supposed to take effect almost one year ago, prompting one board member to ask why they were allowed to stay in business if they were violating the law.

Lynn Diehl, director of the Office of Dog Law Enforcement, said state dog wardens were working with the remaining kennels to get them into compliance.

“Nowhere in the law does it say unless the state takes a different position,” said Tom Hickey, a board member from West Chester. “They were supposed to be in compliance on July 1, 2011.”

Advisory board members also took issue with the agency’s admission that it was not monitoring ventilation in kennels once engineers had certified them.

“That’s like the Department of Transportation saying you passed the emissions test once, so we’re not going to check it again,” said Marsha Perelman, a board member from Wynnewood. “It’s illogical and illegal.”

By the end of the exchange, Michael Pechart, executive deputy secretary to Agriculture Secretary George Greig, said he would consider reviewing the agency’s policy on ventilation requirements.

But that didn’t assuage the board members or many of the 50 attendees, among them representatives from the ASPCA and the Humane Society of the United States, the nation’s two largest animal-welfare organizations. Those groups, whose staff were involved in helping draft the dog law, are angry about what they see as a pattern of the agency’s ignoring the law, including in one case awarding a kennel license to the wife of a convicted animal abuser.

“It’s appalling that the department has unilaterally decided they have the ability to ignore part of the law and regulations when convenient,” said Sarah Speed, Pennsylvania state director of the Humane Society, one of several groups considering suing the state over nonenforcement of the law.

Since the passage of the landmark dog law, the number of commercial kennels in Pennsylvania supplying puppies to pet shops in the region plummeted from a high of 350, with most breeders deciding they could not afford the costly renovations needed to comply with the law. The issue of the treatment of dogs living in puppy mills was one of the most hotly debated in Harrisburg in the last six years, generating record numbers of e-mails to the governor and lawmakers, turnpike billboards, rallies, and two years of legislative debate. Since the new administration took office, animal-welfare activists have become concerned that the philosophy of the Department of Agriculture was shifting away from enforcement in an effort to keep kennels, which are often located on farms, in business.

The meeting came amid a dismal fiscal outlook for the Office of Dog Law Enforcement, which is supported largely by individual dog licenses, and is on track to run out of money next year.

Contact Amy Worden at 717-783-2584 or aworden@phillynews.com, or follow on Twitter @inkyamy.

 and

How Diehl ended up being installed at dog law is unclear. At the top of the job description’s list of essential functions is: knowledge of the care, handling and breeding of dogs, followed by knowledge of various types of dog kennels, business and groups in Pennsylvania.

She met none of those qualifications, according to her resume.

When Diehl took office on June 15, agency officials told me that “she has a dog” when I questioned her lack of experience.

We know things are a mess and hiring an unexperienced person makes it all that much evident that dog welfare is at the bottom of our lawmakers’ priority lists.

We mentioned a few months ago that our very own volunteer extraordinaire, Ann Johnson, will be taking classes this month in order to be certified as a cruelty officer. Her first order of duty was attending the long-awaited dog law meeting. Here are her impressions in her own words:

Notes on the Dog Law Advisory Board Meeting on April 25, 2012

 

It was a day to watch the Office of Dog Law Enforcement stare blankly when questioned about their non-compliance with the new dog law. It was a day to listen to excuse after excuse as to why kennels are not issued citations or closed down for non-compliance, cruelty, horrific kennel conditions, and more. 

It was a day to see this Office display the most incredibly blasé, non-caring, almost cavalier disregard for the law, an “I am above the law” attitude. Even under well-deserved accusations from an angry Board member, they did not flinch from the stand they have taken…we don’t care about that law, or about upholding the law.

 

It would appear that this new group, under the Corbett Administration, (…and he sure knows how to pick ’em) has decided to “interpret” the 2008 dog law that all of you fought so hard to pass. So far, Lynn Diehl has basically done almost nothing except “consider” the aspects of that 2008 Dog Law. What I heard was that the state might take a different position on compliance with this new law, rather than following the law!!!!! It is actually ignoring the law. The State of Pennsylvania should be ashamed of this department….

 

Diehl proposes that she have the last say in whether a Cruelty Officer, or a Dog Law Police Officer can actually seize an abused dog, call a humane league or a rescue. She is proposing a new policy whereby an officer would have to get her permission first.  She wants dog law wardens to “warn’ and then return later to check. Diehl also told wardens that they were not to contact humane societies. Well, dog lovers everywhere…good luck! IF we can get hold of her, and IF we can get her permission, and IF we can call a rescue, and IF we can issue citations, we might save a dog. Meanwhile, the message to puppy millers is loud and clear: do whatever you want; there are no consequences.

 

Lynn Diehl displayed little knowledge of her duties. She deferred most questions to her assistant, who actually knew many of the answers. Ms. Diehl should know those answers.

 

Several members of the advisory board suggested that subcommittees be established. Luckily, these particular board members seemed genuinely against puppy mills. The subcommittees suggested are: 1. Enforcement Action of the Dog Law (silly me, I thought that was the Office’s job…)  2. Standards for dog care,  3. Dog licenses as revenue  sources. It was agreed the sub-committees be formed, which could be a good thing if they are chaired by one of the people who suggested them. I am sure this was proposed as a way to possibly get something done that should be getting done by the Dog Law Office, but will never get done by them. It’s a good idea and I hope it materializes.

 

Also, the “office” has sort of committed to another meeting with public input in the next 6-8 weeks. No date set.

 

Many rescues and animal rights advocates were there, and spoke out, too, against the performance, or lack thereof, of the “office”. Secretary Greig advised the speakers in a flat, bored, condescending tone, not to repeat anything another person had already mentioned. But each speaker spoke of ideas such as simply closing the mills altogether, voiced disgust that once again the situation for the dogs has reverted to the bad old days, and disbelief that the law is not being upheld.

 

One speaker asked for a “Statement of Intent” from the Dog Law Office. We shall see if they can even come up with one. I do not see any evidence of one now, except to disregard the law.

 

There was a long discussion about dog licenses, led by Secretary Greig, concerning ways to ensure that all dog owners paid for their dogs’ licenses, as this generates revenue for his office. At the very end of the meeting, a long-time dog advocate reported that he had checked Secretary Greig’s dog license records and found that Mr. Greig does NOT have a dog license for either of his dogs….

 

By MICHAEL RUBINKAM Associated Press

ALLENTOWN, Pa. April 24, 2012 (AP)

The state office that regulates Pennsylvania’s dog-breeding industry is running out of money, has been slow to enforce new regulations meant to improve the lives of tens of thousands of kennel dogs, and faces charges that it’s once again going easy on operators of so-called “puppy mills.”

Members of the state-sanctioned Dog Law Advisory Board say the problems threaten to undo years of hard-won progress in the fight against substandard breeders who mistreat their dogs — and recall a time in the not-so-distant past when Pennsylvania was known as the puppy mill capital of the East.

“I see no leadership. I’m seeing nothing that shows me there is any concern about the welfare of animals,” said advisory board member Tom Hickey Sr. “Pennsylvanians care about dogs, and when they hear what’s going on, there will be an uprising about this.”

Read the rest here

Let’s just hope this uprising happens sooner rather than later.