Monday, January 18, 2010

This Seems Wrong

Regarding a MN puppy mill investigated by a Boston TV station and others:
The U.S. Department of Agriculture, in its final decision and order, stated that [Kathy] Bauck is "unfit" to be licensed because she operated her kennel in a criminally improper manner.
And by "criminally improper" they mean:
[...] emaciated dogs, sick dogs and others being dunked in a tub of diluted but toxic insecticide that is only supposed to be used on swine.
The government is revoking Bauck's license to deal dogs based on her conviction of animal cruelty and torture in March 2009. The year before, she pleaded guilty to practicing veterinary medicine without a license. Both times Bauck spent time in jail.
OK so this all sounds pretty bad. And my first reaction was "Thank goodness the government finally did something to help these dogs!" But:
Bauck will still be allowed to keep her animals because they're considered her personal property.
And she can continue selling dogs online since the USDA doesn't regulate that. But she has to wait 2 years before re-applying for a USDA license so I guess that'll learn her. As for the dogs, well we can always hope the Boston TV station, the animal activists, the U.S. justice system and the USDA are all wrong and Ms. Bauck really takes great care of her pets.


elaine said...

In my view, both the USDA and the federal court that upheld the revocation of Bauck's license failed in their responsibility to deal effectively with this situation. She should have been investigated for animal cruelty under the Minnesota statutes, but USDA did not seek that remedy (as far as I know), nor did any other officials who were aware of Bauck's practices - such as performing a C-section on an unanesthetized dog. Even absent prosecution in the state courts, USDA and/or Minnesota humane agents and/or Minnesota law enforcement officials could have asked the federal court to exercise pendent jurisdiction in order to apply the remedies available under Minnesota law - which include prohibiting a person convicted of cruelty from owning animals; relinquishing animals; fines; and jail or prison time (depending on previous convictions).

This kind of abuse can be dealt with effectively if the existing laws are applied.


Anonymous said...

And it is UTTERLY maddening that they aren't.

Kathy Bauck could be the poster woman for animal abuse. She shouldn't be allowed to keep body lice.