Coalition to Ban Ohio Dog Auctions

Coalition to Ban Ohio Dog Auctions is an Ohio citizen-driven, community based, registered Political Action Committee (PAC) with the Ohio Secretary of State.  We are recognized as a §501(c)(4) organization by the Internal Revenue Service.

May 22, 2010 Ohio Dog Auction

May 2010 USDA Audit

• James/Ruth Mullett (J&R Kennel - Sugarcreek)
• Alvin/Ervin Hershberger (A&E Kennels - Sugarcreek)
• Abe Miller (House of Pets - Fresno; Ohio Professional Dog Breeders Association)
• Loran Schlabach (Walnut Valley Kennel - Dundee)
• Andy Yoder (Millersburg)
• Myron/Naomi Yoder (Redoy Kennel - Millersburg)
• Owen Yoder (Millersburg)
• Reuben Schlabach (Sharp Run Kennels - Millersburg)
• David Hershberger (Charm/Millersburg)
• Robert Perry (Chestnut Grove Kennel - Mt. Sterling)
• 22 - Columbus, OH (awaiting confirmation of identity)
• Andy/Naomi Troyer (Woodland Kennel - Fredericktown)

* A request for all documentation pertaining to these facilities was requested under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and will be published upon receipt from the USDA.

Section 1: Enforcement; Finding 1: AC's Enforcement Process Was Ineffective Against Problematic Dealers

Example 3 (pages 12-13; includes Figure 4 - Deep Pool of Feces and Urine Under Occupied Kennel): 

At a facility in Ohio with 88 adult dogs, AC cited the breeder for 23 violations (including 7 repeats) during 3 inspections from August 2005 to January 2008. In July 2007, AC sent an official warning to correct the identified care and cleanliness violations or face a "more severe penalty." In January 2008, AC found the same violations but, instead of imposing a more severe penalty, sent another official warning.

National instructions state that an official warning can be sent if no other enforcement action was taken against the violator in the previous 3 years.  In this case, the violator had received an official warning 7 months before so a more serious action was warranted. When we asked AC why a more serious action was not taken, regional management told us that the breeder was making progress. Consequently, national instructions were not followed in order to give the breeder "a reasonable opportunity" to comply with AWA.

Four months later, during our visit to the facility in June 2008, AC cited the breeder for another 9 violations (including 4 repeats). For example, a large amount of feces and urine was pooled under the kennels producing an overpowering odor (see figure 4). The inspector recommended no enforcement action.

Four months later, the breeder was re-inspected and cited for 4 more violations (including 3 repeats). Again, AC took no enforcement action because the violator was "making credible progress," as noted in AC’s "Enforcement Action Option Worksheet."

Section 2: Stipulations; Finding 4: APHIS Misused Guidelines to Lower Penalties for AWA Violators

Good Faith Penalty Reduction (page 33): 

Good faith is defined in the guidelines as "a person who shows good faith may be willing to comply and correct violations; have animals that are in good health that do not suffer as a result of the violations. . . . In contrast, [a person who] lacks good faith may: have repeat violations . . . engage in regulated activity after having surrendered their license or after being notified of the Act’s licensing requirements."

If the violator demonstrates good faith, APHIS reduces the statutory maximum on the penalty worksheet by 50 percent. If the violator demonstrates a lack of good faith, a penalty reduction is not applied. However, APHIS established a third penalty reduction—25 percent—which it gives to the majority of violators that are unable to show either evidence of good faith or a lack of it—no evidence either way.

We found 13 cases where the agency applied a 50-percent or 25-percent good faith penalty reduction without merit.  This included:

One licensed breeder in Ohio, with no veterinary qualifications, operated on a pregnant dog without anesthesia; the breeder delayed calling a veterinarian and the dog bled to death. The inspector also found that 40 percent of the dogs in the kennel were blind due to an outbreak of Leptospirosis. The inspector determined that the facility’s water was contaminated and had caused the outbreak.

Guidelines state that "a person who shows ‘good faith’ . . . [has] animals that are in good health that do not suffer as a result of the violations . . ."  Despite the lack of good faith demonstrated by the breeder, APHIS applied a 25-percent good faith penalty reduction to lower the penalty. Four months later, a subsequent inspection continued to document violations at the facility. The inspector reported that "this is a veterinary care issue that continues to be a serious problem—failure to provide adequate veterinary care for over 200 adult dogs."

History of Violations (page 33):  

We found that in 22 cases, APHIS allowed a 25-percent reduction of the maximum penalty amounts for "no prior history of violations," even though the violators had a prior history of violations, as shown in the IES tracking system or through our review of the case files:

A breeder in Ohio with about 62 adult dogs was cited for 1 minor, 16 significant, and 12 serious violations during 5 inspections between 2005 and 2006. The violations included the breeder’s failure to inform his attending veterinarian that some of his dogs delivered dead puppies, which is important if the puppies died of a disease like Brucellosis. The breeder was also cited for administering medications to his dogs without his attending veterinarian’s knowledge. Although the breeder was issued an official warning in 2005 for numerous violations including inadequate veterinary care, APHIS gave him a 25-percent penalty reduction in 2007 for "no prior history of violations."

October 7, 2009 Ohio Dog Auction 

After combing the auction on Oct. 7, Bill Smith and his group, Main Line Animal Rescue (MLAR), along with Pennsylvania SPCA agents and veterinarians, purchased 12 Lancaster County dogs that they planned to use as evidence showing that abuse still existed at some kennels a year after passage of a tougher dog law.

When the group returned to Pennsylvania hours after the purchase, state SPCA officials prepared charges against six of the 12 Lancaster County breeders who sent dogs to the auction.  "The dogs were in absolutely deplorable conditions," said William Lamb, whose West Chester law firm represented the state SPCA. "Based on the state of neglect of the animals, criminal charges were filed."  

Sadly, the case fell apart and the charges were withdrawn against breeders Loren Nolt of East Earl; James Zimmerman of Ephrata; Nathan Myer of Lititz; Ella Mae Zimmerman of New Holland; Steve Stoltzfus of Lititz; and John S. Fisher of Gordonville. Kennel inspection reports (available on request) for several of the breeders charged in this case reflect that they had been warned by state inspectors for housing dogs exhibiting signs of poor health.

• Nathan Myer's April 2009 inspection report notes seven female dogs displaying signs of paw or leg injuries, as well as a Llasa with an eye injury and another dog who is unresponsive and lethargic. It is only after Myer is ordered by the state that he provides these dogs with veterinary care.

• John S. Fisher surrendered four dogs with questionable health to the Lancaster Humane League in 2007. In April 2008, Fisher was ordered by the state to have a Boston Terrier in his kennel seen by a vet.  According to the report, the dog had been involved in a fight with another dog and was limping with lacerations on her front leg.  The dog had been injured days before, but was treated only after Fisher was required to do so by the state.

• James Zimmerman's July 2009 inspection report mentions a black Cocker Spaniel appearing to have an untreated cherry eye in its left eye. Oddly enough, one of the dogs purchased by the PSPCA at the Ohio auction three months later was a black Cocker Spaniel with an untreated cherry eye in its left eye from Zimmerman's kennels! If this is the same dog, then did state inspector Travis Hess fail to follow-up with Zimmerman after ordering him to have the dog seen by a vet within seventy-two hours back in July? Did this dog continue to suffer for another three months until finally being sent to auction in Ohio? Was the vet who signed off on this dog in July, the same vet who signed the dog's health certificate for the auction in Ohio?

> Read the rest of the story...


UPDATE!   Scarlet-Maple Farm Kennel in Lancaster, owned by Daniel P. Esh (a breeder who consigned dogs at the October 7, 2009 auction), has been closed by the Pennsylvania Bureau of Dog Law effective March 19, 2010!  Mr. Esh's commercial kennel license was revoked in 2008 because of poor kennel conditions. During multiple inspections in 2007 and 2008 (available on request), dog wardens found moldy food, poor maintenance, excessive feces, rodents and inadequate cage sizes for the dogs, among other violations.


March 21, 2009 Ohio Dog Auction

Animals’ Angels investigators were present at the March 21 Dog Auction in Farmerstown, Ohio.  Upon arrival, they immediately noticed a white trailer full of dog crates piled on top of each other. The truck and the trailer violate several federal regulations.

The investigators confirmed that the truck pulling the trailer belonged to the kennel, "Pick of the Litter“ from Minnesota.  The owner, Kathy Bauck, sold a significant number of dogs at the Farmerstown auction. Animals’ Angels will present the evidence to authorities in charge.

> Read the investigative report...

 

January 17, 2009 Ohio Dog Auction 

Animals’ Angels investigators were present at the January 17 Dog Auction in Farmerstown, Ohio.

Approximately 380 dogs from kennels in Pennsylvania, Kentucky and Ohio, brought in the night before on large trucks, were piled up in tiny cages.  Many of these dogs appeared to be very scared and their spirit broken. 

Animals’ Angels will provide lawmakers with information obtained to support a ban on such sales. 

> Read the investigative report...  > Read the USDA-APHIS report (pages 16-24)...