• Welcome to the Chronicle Forums.
    Please complete your profile. The forums and the rest of www.chronofhorse.com has single sign-in, so your log in information for one will automatically work for the other. Disclaimer: The opinions expressed here are the views of the individual and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of The Chronicle of the Horse.

Announcement

Collapse

Forum rules and no-advertising policy

As a participant on this forum, it is your responsibility to know and follow our rules. Please read this message in its entirety.

Board Rules

1. You’re responsible for what you say.
As outlined in Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, The Chronicle of the Horse and its affiliates, as well Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd., the developers of vBulletin, are not legally responsible for statements made in the forums.

This is a public forum viewed by a wide spectrum of people, so please be mindful of what you say and who might be reading it—details of personal disputes are likely better handled privately. While posters are legally responsible for their statements, the moderators may in their discretion remove or edit posts that violate these rules. Users have the ability to modify or delete their own messages after posting, but administrators generally will not delete posts, threads or accounts upon request.

Outright inflammatory, vulgar, harassing, malicious or otherwise inappropriate statements and criminal charges unsubstantiated by a reputable news source or legal documentation will not be tolerated and will be dealt with at the discretion of the moderators.

2. Conversations in horse-related forums should be horse-related.
The forums are a wonderful source of information and support for members of the horse community. While it’s understandably tempting to share information or search for input on other topics upon which members might have a similar level of knowledge, members must maintain the focus on horses.

3. Keep conversations productive, on topic and civil.
Discussion and disagreement are inevitable and encouraged; personal insults, diatribes and sniping comments are unproductive and unacceptable. Whether a subject is light-hearted or serious, keep posts focused on the current topic and of general interest to other participants of that thread. Utilize the private message feature or personal email where appropriate to address side topics or personal issues not related to the topic at large.

4. No advertising in the discussion forums.
Posts in the discussion forums directly or indirectly advertising horses, jobs, items or services for sale or wanted will be removed at the discretion of the moderators. Use of the private messaging feature or email addresses obtained through users’ profiles for unsolicited advertising is not permitted.

Company representatives may participate in discussions and answer questions about their products or services, or suggest their products on recent threads if they fulfill the criteria of a query. False "testimonials" provided by company affiliates posing as general consumers are not appropriate, and self-promotion of sales, ad campaigns, etc. through the discussion forums is not allowed.

Paid advertising is available on our classifieds site and through the purchase of banner ads. The tightly monitored Giveaways forum permits free listings of genuinely free horses and items available or wanted (on a limited basis). Items offered for trade are not allowed.

Advertising Policy Specifics
When in doubt of whether something you want to post constitutes advertising, please contact a moderator privately in advance for further clarification. Refer to the following points for general guidelines:

Horses – Only general discussion about the buying, leasing, selling and pricing of horses is permitted. If the post contains, or links to, the type of specific information typically found in a sales or wanted ad, and it’s related to a horse for sale, regardless of who’s selling it, it doesn’t belong in the discussion forums.

Stallions – Board members may ask for suggestions on breeding stallion recommendations. Stallion owners may reply to such queries by suggesting their own stallions, only if their horse fits the specific criteria of the original poster. Excessive promotion of a stallion by its owner or related parties is not permitted and will be addressed at the discretion of the moderators.

Services – Members may use the forums to ask for general recommendations of trainers, barns, shippers, farriers, etc., and other members may answer those requests by suggesting themselves or their company, if their services fulfill the specific criteria of the original post. Members may not solicit other members for business if it is not in response to a direct, genuine query.

Products – While members may ask for general opinions and suggestions on equipment, trailers, trucks, etc., they may not list the specific attributes for which they are in the market, as such posts serve as wanted ads.

Event Announcements – Members may post one notification of an upcoming event that may be of interest to fellow members, if the original poster does not benefit financially from the event. Such threads may not be “bumped” excessively. Premium members may post their own notices in the Event Announcements forum.

Charities/Rescues – Announcements for charitable or fundraising events can only be made for 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organizations. Special exceptions may be made, at the moderators’ discretion and direction, for board-related events or fundraising activities in extraordinary circumstances.

Occasional posts regarding horses available for adoption through IRS-registered horse rescue or placement programs are permitted in the appropriate forums, but these threads may be limited at the discretion of the moderators. Individuals may not advertise or make announcements for horses in need of rescue, placement or adoption unless the horse is available through a recognized rescue or placement agency or government-run entity or the thread fits the criteria for and is located in the Giveaways forum.

5. Do not post copyrighted photographs unless you have purchased that photo and have permission to do so.

6. Respect other members.
As members are often passionate about their beliefs and intentions can easily be misinterpreted in this type of environment, try to explore or resolve the inevitable disagreements that arise in the course of threads calmly and rationally.

If you see a post that you feel violates the rules of the board, please click the “alert” button (exclamation point inside of a triangle) in the bottom left corner of the post, which will alert ONLY the moderators to the post in question. They will then take whatever action, or no action, as deemed appropriate for the situation at their discretion. Do not air grievances regarding other posters or the moderators in the discussion forums.

Please be advised that adding another user to your “Ignore” list via your User Control Panel can be a useful tactic, which blocks posts and private messages by members whose commentary you’d rather avoid reading.

7. We have the right to reproduce statements made in the forums.
The Chronicle of the Horse may copy, quote, link to or otherwise reproduce posts, or portions of posts, in print or online for advertising or editorial purposes, if attributed to their original authors, and by posting in this forum, you hereby grant to The Chronicle of the Horse a perpetual, non-exclusive license under copyright and other rights, to do so.

8. We reserve the right to enforce and amend the rules.
The moderators may delete, edit, move or close any post or thread at any time, or refrain from doing any of the foregoing, in their discretion, and may suspend or revoke a user’s membership privileges at any time to maintain adherence to the rules and the general spirit of the forum. These rules may be amended at any time to address the current needs of the board.

Please see our full Terms of Service and Privacy Policy for more information.

Thanks for being a part of the COTH forums!

(Revised 1/26/16)
See more
See less

Basset Hound Pack - NAIA to defend

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Basset Hound Pack - NAIA to defend

    Got the post below from my German Shepherd Dog e-list.

    (Link to original Around the Farm thread here: http://www.chronicleforums.com/Forum...d.php?t=218007 )

    Willard Basset Defense

    Posted by: "Julian Prager" resolutebulldogs@verizon.net bulldogger18092
    Mon Aug 17, 2009 6:13 pm (PDT)

    The National Animal Interest Alliance is coordinating a defense fund for
    Wendy Willard whose hounds were seized by the Philadelphia Society for
    Prevention of Cruelty to Animals under questionable circumstances.
    An attorney has been obtained and we are working with him to
    coordinate assistance from a number of interested groups, including
    the Masters of Foxhounds of Association, the National Beagle Club of
    America, Inc., the Pennsylvania Federation of Dog Clubs, local hunt
    clubs, local dog clubs and other interested parties.

    In addition, these groups and their members will be available to
    provide informational resources to bolster the defense in this case.
    We are exploring further actions regarding the Philadelphia dog limit
    law, their spay/neuter requirements, the possibly unconstitutional
    taking of her property and the violation of her civil rights. These
    actions will be costly, but we believe they are worthwhile. The NAIA
    Trust uses its funds to combat overreaching legislation and to combat
    these types of laws around the country.

    If your club or you are able to donate to this crucial effort to
    correct injustice and combat laws that take away our right to own
    dogs, donations to the Defense Fund may be made on-line through PayPal
    or by credit card by clicking on the following link and entering the
    amount to be donated in the input box. After entering the amount of
    the donation, click on the "Submit" button which takes you to the page
    where you can identify yourself and provide credit card information.
    Please insert "Defense" in the space on the line available for the
    "billing address Line 2" so we can keep an accurate accounting of
    donations. The donation link is http://www.naiatrust.org/donationForm.htm

    If you wish to mail a contribution, you can send it to:
    NAIA Trust Legal Defense Fund
    PO Box 66579
    Portland Oregon 97290-6579
    Please circulate this to any interested parties.

  • #2
    Should I have heard of NAIA? Their website seems like they have not been very active in the last 12 months

    It may just be my ingrained suspicion, but it concerns me that there is not a direct quote from Wendy Willard in that statement. Has she asked them to defend her? It is very hard to defend somebody who has decided that laying low and not antagonizing local law enforcement is the Solomon option.

    http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php...erest_Alliance

    Comment


    • #3
      I have not dealt with them personally so this is all second hand, but I believe that this is the group that is headed by a vet who also sits on the AKC board and have been around for a while. They are legit as far as I know but whether you agree with their positions is another question
      There is something about the outside of a horse that is good for the inside of a man.(Churchill)

      Comment


      • #4
        Don't infer that silence is somehow "laying low".

        If she's represented by an attorney, her attorney would have advised her to remain silent.

        That is perfectly normal and should not be interpreted to mean anything.
        Brothers and sisters, I bid you beware
        Of giving your heart to a dog to tear.
        -Rudyard Kipling

        Comment


        • #5
          Bad Idea

          NAIA Trust and Julian Prager wouldn't be the first litigation team that I'd consider in this case. Neither has won a case anywhere with their unconstitutional taking claims. I believe they're the principals or funders in four cases that are floundering or moot. The chief CA lobbist for dog owners was just sued by the state, for fraud. He took $400,000 in 2007, with no accounting.

          Time for Dennis Foster to speak up and make the case for a separate MFA funded defense/amici filing, if one's appropriate. No one approves of the way Ms Willard was treated, but donations to such legal efforts require fiscal oversight and policy accountability.
          Last edited by Bob Kane; Aug. 19, 2009, 11:27 AM.
          Bob Kane, Chairman Emeritus
          Virginia Hunting Dog Owners' Association
          Sportsmen and Animal Owners' Voting Alliance
          http://vhdoa.uplandbirddog.com http://saova.org

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by tangledweb View Post
            Should I have heard of NAIA? Their website seems like they have not been very active in the last 12 months

            It may just be my ingrained suspicion, but it concerns me that there is not a direct quote from Wendy Willard in that statement. Has she asked them to defend her? It is very hard to defend somebody who has decided that laying low and not antagonizing local law enforcement is the Solomon option.

            http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php...erest_Alliance
            NAIA is okay by me, and I will send a contribution to the defense fund.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Bob Kane View Post
              NAIA Trust and Julian Prager wouldn't be the first litigation team that I'd consider in this case. Neither has won a case anywhere with their unconstitutional taking claims. I believe they're the principals or funders in four cases that are floundering or moot.
              Hmm. I'll have to look those up.

              Generally, Fifth Amendment takings arguments aren't going to be successful in cases involving personal, as opposed to real, property. (See, e.g. Lucas v. SC Coastal Council) Courts will often find the owner has no right to a use of personal property when the state may legitimately forbid that use under its police powers.

              However, many circuits have held that a person has a protected interest in their dogs under the Fourth Amendment, which of course protects ones effects from unreasonable search and seizure.

              So I wonder why they'd bring the cases as takings claims?
              I'm not ignoring the rules. I'm interpreting the rules. Tamal, The Great British Baking Show

              Comment


              • #8
                NAIA

                Source Watch says NAIA is part of the evil empire. Anyone Source Watch is against is good with me.

                There are many, many lobbying organizations fighting in the CA anti-dog legislation. I don't know, but would suspect, that it is one of the newer ones that had accounting problems, and that it was ignorance, not theft. Wouldn't be surprised if it was HSUS that got them in trouble.

                Bashing our fellow fighters against the AR movement is probably not in our own best interests.

                Comment


                • #9
                  PetPAC's Bill Hemby sued by California in "Operation False Charity"

                  Originally posted by SmartysMom View Post
                  Source Watch says NAIA is part of the evil empire. Anyone Source Watch is against is good with me.

                  There are many, many lobbying organizations fighting in the CA anti-dog legislation. I don't know, but would suspect, that it is one of the newer ones that had accounting problems, and that it was ignorance, not theft. Wouldn't be surprised if it was HSUS that got them in trouble.

                  Bashing our fellow fighters against the AR movement is probably not in our own best interests.
                  Did you join COH today, just to comment on this thread? Contrary facts are frequently nettlesome:


                  ----- Original Message -----
                  Subject: PetPAC's Bill Hemby sued by California in "Operation False Charity"


                  Dear Friends:

                  PetPAC's "star witness" against spay and neuter legislation is in trouble.

                  Bill Hemby, Chairman of PetPAC and a chief opponent of SB 250, has been named as a defendant in a lawsuit filed by the California Department of Justice, as part of a nationwide sweep called "Operation False Charity."

                  The complaint alleges that Mr. Hemby, serving as Director and in various positions of authority in the charity organization LEAP (Law Enforcement Apprenticeship Program Foundation) from 2004 to the present, along with the program's other directors, falsely promised contributors that their donations would be used to operate an apprenticeship program for at-risk youth.

                  According to the complaint, the program was never operated and no students were ever enrolled in it. The donations were instead used to pay for non-charity related purposes, including the personal expenses of the charity's directors.

                  The lawsuit against Mr. Hemby and LEAP is one of eight lawsuits filed by Attorney General Edmund G. Brown Jr. against "charities that 'shamelessly exploited' people's generosity and squandered millions of dollars of donations intended to help police, firefighters and veterans", according to the news release from the Attorney General's office.

                  Among the charges that the State of California makes directly against Mr. Hemby:

                  FILING AND DISTRIBUTING FALSE AND INCOMPLETE RECORDS
                  This cause of action claims that non-program expenditures were not properly disclosed, including one year where out of $372,623 in revenue, only $5,615 was spent on program services (less than 2%).

                  BREACH OF CHARITABLE TRUST
                  This cause of action claims that money was solicited for charitable programs that were never even put in place.

                  UNLAWFUL BUSINESS ACTS OR PRACTICES
                  This cause of action claims the defendents (Mr. Hemby and LEAP), from 2001 to 2008, were "making false, deceptive, and misleading statements to donors to induce them to make charitable contributions" and "misrepresented how charitable donations would be used."

                  Bill Hemby and the COPS connection.

                  In the same Operation False Charity sweep, the State of California has sued the charity group COPS, where Mr. Hemby is currently the Director of Governmental Affairs. Ironically, the COPS website still contains a link to an interview described as "in this podcast, one of COPS founding members, Bill Hemby, discusses how LEAP, the Law Enforcement Apprenticeship Program, helps at-risk youth seek careers in law enforcement." The actual podcast has been taken off the site.

                  SCIL has been warning about the fundraising tricks used by the COPS group since 2007, when COPS first came out against our spay and neuter legislation. The COPS area on our website www.PetPACNonsense.com details some of the tricks that the group uses to bring in donations. According to the DOJ lawsuit, donations to COPS in 2006 totaled $11.4 million.

                  What does this mean for Bill Hemby and PetPAC?

                  The State of California is requesting judgment against Mr. Hemby and the other LEAP defendants in the form of numerous damages and civil penalties, and a permanent injunction prohibiting Mr. Hemby from controlling or directing the operations of any California nonprofit public benefit corporation.

                  If the State is successful in their lawsuit, Mr. Hemby will presumably be required to either dissolve PetPAC or remove himself from association with the group, since he is currently Chairman of the group, and their sole lobbyist according to the California Secretary of State website. According to the DOJ website, donations to PetPAC in the 2007 fiscal year totaled $424,648.00.

                  What does this mean for spay and neuter legislation?

                  For years, we have been warning about the dangers of sending money to, or receiving information from, the special interest groups and individuals opposed to spay and neuter legislation. They consistently misrepresent the spay and neuter issue for their own personal or financial gain, while misrepresenting themselves as "responsible pet owners" instead of revealing who they really are. The fact that the primary mouthpiece for the opposition, Bill Hemby, is now being sued by the State of California is not a surprise. In hearing after hearing, we have seen Mr. Hemby misrepresent SB 250, and have come to expect that any information from PetPAC is not to be trusted.

                  In fact, we have come to expect that information from any breeder or animal industry group opposed to SB 250 is not to be trusted.

                  It is ironic that, at the same time Mr. Hemby and these groups have been increasing their distribution of phony charts and spreadsheets pretending that spay and neuter legislation does not work, the actual communities where these laws are in effect keep telling just the opposite story.

                  In fact, take a look at the following:

                  Mr. Hemby and breeder groups have been distributing information and misleading graphs that claim spay and neuter legislation does not work in Santa Cruz. But according to Santa Cruz, the law has "resulted in a 64% drop in shelter impounds"! You can read the story directly from the Santa Cruz SPCA here.

                  Mr. Hemby and breeder groups have been distributing information that claims spay and neuter legislation does not work in Lake County, CA. But, according to the Director of Lake County Animal Care & Control, "Since enacting the ordinance our numbers have gone down steadily each year. Our spay & neuter ordinance works! We have no increased cost related to the ordinance, in fact it has saved us money..."

                  Mr. Hemby and breeder groups have been distributing false information that claims spay and neuter legislation does not work anywhere it is implemented. But in New York City, where a law nearly identical to SB 250 was passed in 2000, the results have been stellar. A recent letter from the Mayor's Alliance for NYC Animals states "we have experienced a steady decrease in the euthanasia rate over the past five years due to this legislation." You can read their letter here.

                  Further reading.

                  If you want to learn more about Operation False Charity and the State of California's lawsuits against deceptive charities, please click here to read the Attorney General's press release.

                  If you want to read the actual lawsuit against Mr. Hemby and LEAP, please click here.

                  If you want to read the actual lawsuit against COPS, please click here.


                  --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                  Now, some great news about AB 241, The Responsible Breeder Act. The Appropriations Committee hearing scheduled for Monday, August 17th, has been waived under rule 28.8, because AB 241 does not incur significant costs for the state. That means AB 241 could be voted on in the full Senate at any time.

                  So, please visit www.YESonAB241.com, and follow the instructions to call your Senator in support of AB 241 this week.


                  --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                  Lastly, here's the latest news on SB 250. SB 250 is going to be voted on soon in the Assembly Appropriations Committee, and then the full Assembly. I will be sending out specific requests for action to help it pass in the next few days. Please keep a look out for the email! We need you.


                  --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                  Thank you for everything you do as a true animal advocate.
                  Best regards,

                  Judie Mancuso
                  President, Social Compassion In Legislation (SCIL)
                  A 501(c)(4) non-profit organization focused on reducing pet overpopulation through legislation.


                  Forward email



                  Social Compassion In Legislation | P.O Box 1125 | Laguna Beach | CA | 92652
                  ================================================== ====

                  If MFA's involved, as asserted, Dennis Foster needs to make the case personally and ensure the donations are properly spent and the legal case doesn't harm hunters' interests.
                  Last edited by Bob Kane; Aug. 19, 2009, 05:20 PM.
                  Bob Kane, Chairman Emeritus
                  Virginia Hunting Dog Owners' Association
                  Sportsmen and Animal Owners' Voting Alliance
                  http://vhdoa.uplandbirddog.com http://saova.org

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Hell, I'm glad that for ONCE, fraudulent solicitation is being taken seriously by a state AG.

                    I've got quite a list of fraudulent charities, and many of us have reported them to the IRS and various state AG's. Repeatedly. To no avail.

                    Sounds like the NAIA and other groups are the victims; not the perpetrators.

                    Not sure why you're posting that information, Mr. Kane. If you're advising people not to donate to NAIA because its officers or employees are accused of criminal misconduct - then say so. If you are saying that NAIA is the victim of fraud, then say so.

                    And if you think that any entity should take a particular course of action - then contact them personally. Don't expect them to monitor the Internet.
                    Brothers and sisters, I bid you beware
                    Of giving your heart to a dog to tear.
                    -Rudyard Kipling

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X