so far as to define anyone who bred and transferred even a single puppy as a “pet store” and required that “pet stores” selling cats or dogs (many as young as 8-9 weeks) to spay/neuter those ani- mals before they were transferred. “We knew about the measure because we’re in New York and it’s a big media hub and we were at least able to change the definition of pet store,” says Goffe, “but when it’s in small towns bills, these bills can become law before we even know they’ve been introduced.” AKC GR relies heavily on legislative liaisons (LLs) and other concerned peo- ple to let us know what’s happening in their communities so we can provide them with resources and help. Goffe stressed, “Being a legislative liaison for AKC GR team is one of the single most important things people can do to have an impact on anti-dog and anti-breeder legislation. “Some of AKC GR’s greatest success- es across the country are the issues that fanciers never hear about. This may be because one of our wonderful legisla- tive liaisons or an alert individual has contacted us when they’ve heard about a potential issue in their community and let us know what’s going on. Thanks to alert legislative liaisons we learn about a slew of issues in local communities and can educate lawmakers before problematic measures are put in place. You don’t have to be a legislative liai- son to develop a relationship with the AKC GR team, however. We think of ourselves as a customer service-based team. Our service is to help educate and protect dog owners and the future of purebred dogs.” That comes in the form of working directly with all of AKC’s constituents and being a conduit to help them com- municate with each other—whether its members of congress or local legis- lators who need to be educated about responsible dog owners and breeders, or whether its dog owners and breed- ers, our Government Relations depart- ment can help educate about how to get involved politically. The key is to pro- vide the facts, resources and informa- tion that dog lovers need to defend their rights, organize their clubs, friends and other groups so they can successfully educate their lawmakers and their com- munities and fight back against laws and misinformation that hurts respon- sible dog owners.
“...IT IS EASY TO GET INVOLVED LOCALLY, AND ONCE LOCAL PEOPLE DO GET INVOLVED AND SHOW HOW A KNOWN, RESPECTED MEMBER OF THE COMMUNITY WILL BE HURT BY A BAD PROPOSAL, IT’S GENERALLY EASIER TO CHANGE OR DEFEAT A BAD PROPOSAL.”
and to get re-elected they must be responsive to their constituents—the people who can vote for or against them at election time. Goffe emphasizes, “This is why our advocacy as dog owners and dog experts is so crucially important if we want to preserve the right to breed, own and exhibit the dog of our choice. The AKC GR team focuses its efforts on helping clubs and individuals succeed in these efforts. “Politicians want to hear from their constituents. They are far more likely to listen to people who may actually vote for them than ‘outsiders.’ If they don’t understand that breeders and fan- ciers are their neighbors and friends and voters, they simply won’t know we exist or consider us relevant. Like- wise, the vast majority of legislators are not dog experts and unless they hear from us, we shouldn’t expect them to have any real expertise on dogs and canine issues.” One of the most significant legisla- tive trends AKC Government Relations (GR) department is seeing is an increase in anti-dog/anti-breeder legislation at the local level. In the last year, they have seen an increase in not only the number of bills, but also the sophistica- tion of legislation at the local level. Where anti-breeder bills have been defeated at the state level, it is common for animal rights and other groups with an agenda to regroup and push for the same policies at the local level. It’s easy for a measure that may seem irrelevant in a community to gain foot- hold if no one is there to oppose it. A good example is the law to ban pet stores/retail pet sales. Such measures often fly through votes in city councils if they don’t have pet stores to oppose
them or no one is paying attention. Once proposals pass in a significant number of communities, whether or not they’re actually relevant to those com- munities, it’s easy to go back to the state and argue that there’s a groundswell of support for it. Meanwhile, it’s possible that no one even bothered looking to see how the term “pet store/retail pet sales” was defined, and it could impact a lot of people who don’t think of them- selves as pet stores! In some respects, the rise in local legislation is a bad news/good news kind of situation. The bad news is that local measures are much harder for AKC GR to get information about and to track. AKC GR uses software to track legislative changes at the federal and state level, but it’s nearly impossible to track every proposal in every small community in America. On the other hand, it is easy to get involved locally, and once local people do get involved and show how a known, respected member of the communi- ty will be hurt by a bad proposal, it’s generally easier to change or defeat a bad proposal. In some states, there has even been a push through state legislation to prompt counties and cities to pass laws that restrict dog ownership at the local level. In New York State, anti-breeder groups failed in passing extreme new regulations on small breeders a couple of years ago. However, they did pass a bill that specifically encouraged the counties and municipalities to pass more restrictive breeder laws. The result was a huge upswing the following year in regressive kennel licensing and breed- er regulations in cities and counties around the state. New York City went
42 • S how S ight M agazine , M arch 2017
Powered by FlippingBook