Yes, I AM biased against pit bulls. You would be too if you had to see half your son’s face ripped off, eyeball hanging from his socket, and skull crushed after a 15 minute pit bull attack and $37,ooo flight for life later. So excuse me for wanting to explore the pit bull issue in depth. So often I wish I could just have my old life back. A completely ignorant and happy life. A life before I had to see my baby ripped to shreds like that. Lying there on that hospital table, lifeless and looking like a hand grenade went off underneath him. A life completely blind to the pit bull issue. I knew their advocates were crazy, but I would just laugh it off like I did so many other things in life. I was just like anyone else and thought they were just like any other dog. The only thing I knew about them is they tended to be aggressive with other dogs.
How I wish that were true. The pit bull lobby is held together by one person’s inheritance. Her name is Jane Berkey. And Jane bought the pit bull lobby months after her father died.
I hope by putting this all in one place, it will shed some light on the pit bull advocacy and ITS bias.
The Pit Bull Propaganda Machine
Whenever someone is evaluating research, the first thing you should do is ask who is paying for the research. Where does the money come from? What are the motives (if any) of the source? Is it a special interest group? Do they have an interest in keeping their products on the shelves?
In this topic the product is pit bulls.
Animal Farm Foundation, Bangall, NY
“Securing equal treatment and opportunity for “pit bull” dogs”
I don’t know about you, but I see a conflict of interest right off the bat. With this statement RIGHT IN THE LOGO, it seems to me that keeping the truth about the history and purpose of the American Pit Bull Terrier hidden from the American public, is in this big cooperation’s best interest. I would like someone to start an organization that “secured equal treatment and opportunity for victims of “pit bull” dog attacks.
The pit bullery connections are incestuous.
That last mascot may or may not seem strange to you. But I guess it would if you knew more about the pit bull advocacy. The sculpture of Jane Berkey’s deceased pit bull was made by Tim Racer. Tim Racer and Donna Reynolds are completely out to lunch when it comes to pit bulls. They are a childless couple who founded BADRAP (Bay Area Dog Lovers Responsible About Pit Bulls) They have recently posted on their Facebook page debunking the“Nanny Dog” myth.”
The National Canine Research Council
The NCRC was founded by Karen Delise, a former vet tech, who wrote a book purporting to show that pit bulls get “a bad rap” and “it is all how you raise them.” I’ll get back to YOU, Karen Delise. The NCRC was subsequently acquired by Animal Farm Foundation which is a pit bull rescue and advocacy group whose mission statement is: “securing equal treatment and opportunity for pit bull dogs”http://www.animalfarmfoundation.org/pages/About-Us-Mission-Statement
This information would not be possible without DogsBite.orgentering into a costly legal battle with AFF over the “Com” domain name (See WIPO dispute). In March 2010, DogsBite.org learned that “DogsBite.com” was purchased for $11,000, registered under a cloaked name then began forwarding to the NCRC website. In order to pursue a domain name dispute,DogsBite.org needed to prove that AFF and NCRC were one in the same. After extensive research, they gained access to the New York state documentation showing Jane Berkey as the owner of NCRC. Up until this point, no one knew that Jane Berkey controlled the NCRC.
Click here to see what happens when you type in DogsBite.com or DogsBite.net for that matter.
If you check the AFF’s website today:
Today, Animal Farm Foundation clearly states on its website in the “About Us” section that the NCRC (National Canine Research Council) is a subsidiary of the AFF.
4. WHAT IS YOUR RELATIONSHIP WITH NATIONAL CANINE RESEARCH COUNCIL?
NCRC is a subsidiary of Animal Farm Foundation. NCRC’s mission benefits all dogs by working to preserve the human-canine bond.
5. WHY DID AFF ACQUIRE NCRC?
While doing our advocacy work on behalf of “pit bull” dogs, we realized there was a real deficit in fact-based, scientific research that promoted the value of the human-canine bond. We knew from history that the cycle of discrimination that is currently plaguing “pit bull” dogs had plagued other groups of dogs and unless we did something to end that cycle, more dogs would be discriminated against in the future.
Karen Delise, the Founder and Director of Research for the National Canine Research Council had already been researching instances of when the human-canine bond was broken. We approached Karen about expanding the mission of NCRC to include preserving the human-canine bond and she agreed. Karen Delise remains the Founder and Director of Research for the National Canine Research Council.
Does your relationship influence their research? It is the other way around. The independent research of NCRC is relevant to all kinds of dogs and dog owners and is therefore often helpful with the mission of Animal Farm Foundation.
Because of this deceitful maneuver by the AFF, DogsBite.ORG has to spend countless hours per year correcting newspaper articles and journalists across the country. Here is one example from right here in my own statethat was recently corrected by DogsBite.org on 8/18/14.
At least 43 municipalities in Wisconsin currently ban or restrict pit bulls, according to DogBites.COM, which tracks dog-breed statistics.
On August 15th, 2007, (The same year of the Michael Vick dogfighting bust) Jane Berkey took control of the National Canine Research Council MONTHS after the death of her father.
This is where it gets tricky.
The National Canine Research Council is an LLC. However, they can set up a 501(c)(4) “Action Fund” for lobbying and to influence legislators.
The IRS provides an exemption under Section 501(c)(4) of the Internal Revenue Code for social welfare organizations (called 501(c)(4) organizations), that are nonprofit in nature and operate exclusively for the promotion of the common good and welfare of a community. These local associations of employees must provide net earnings exclusively for the purpose of charitable, educational or recreational goals. The NAACP and AARP are examples of 501(c)(4) organizations that are classified as groups promoting social welfare primarily for the common good and welfare of a community.
In 2009 the AFF “name shifted” their action fund as the National Canine Research Council.
Now that Jane Berkey has acquired the NCRC as an LLC, their donations are not tax-deductible, however, they do not have to disclose who their donors are. Now that the NCRC has an action fund, Jane Berkey is free to use her money to influence lawmakers and protect the pit bulls from breed-specific legislation. (BSL)
A closer look at the National Canine Research Council 2013 action fund had $78,237 and the end of the year had $73,754. If you look closer at the forms you can see that the NCRC contributed to the passage of “Improved animal control and animal protection legislation by the state of Ohio house of representatives.”
The action fund claims to have influenced Ohio to drop BSL for two different years. I wonder if Ohio legislators knew who and what they were dealing with when they stripped hundreds of jurisdictions in their state of their right to keep their citizens safe from a known and well documented dangerous breed? One thing is for sure: The more we let pit bull apologists and special interest groups, that only have the interests of animal welfare in mind, public safety will continue to fall by the wayside. The more we allow special interest groups to influence legislators, the more maimings, maulings and deaths of humans and animals we will endure. Many jurisdictions in Ohio that already had BSL were grandfathered in and allowed to keep the bans. Other cities, like Reynoldsburg, recently upheld their pit bull bans despitemore than a year of pleas from pit bull advocates.
No comments:
Post a Comment