Category: Legal, Laws, and Regs

It is not difficult to make a digital copy of an inspection report. Most modern printers that make copies now have the ability to scan the copies into a PDF just as quickly as you can make the paper copy.

There is no reason for any agency, Missourian or otherwise, to not have digital copies of all their records. Not only does having digital copies of inspection reports decrease the need for paper, but it also ensures reasonable access of the records, as well as backup in case of fire, flood, and other disaster.

I have no idea what kind of information system the Department of Agriculture in Missouri has in place. I do know that, considering the interest people have in inspection records, the organization could more effectively deal with requests if it just provided the information via a simple to use online system. The USDA caught on to the advantages of such a system a few years back, which is why we can access so much USDA information online.

In fact, it’s easier to access information about Missouri agriculture at the USDA then it is to access information at the Missouri Department of Agriculture.

One major reason to allow better access to inspection records and other data online is that this is probably one of the most effective ways of shutting down bad commercial dog breeders.

Since the USDA simplified the process of accessing inspection records, several breeders have given up their USDA licenses. Frankly, they didn’t like the fact that everyone they knew could see that they’re too lazy to clean up the piles of feces, or that their dogs are sick or injured and not given care. You can see their hostility to the new public exposure in their recent treatment of USDA inspectors.

In December, 2010, when inspectors arrived at the infamous Mar-Don Kennels, they were not met with openness:

We began the inspection and, after finding non-compliant items in the first section of the outdoor housing, the licensee became upset.

The licensee stated, “I’m done with this crap, I’m giving up, I’m surrendering my license”, and stormed away entering the house. We followed the licensee and waited for her to come out of the house at which time she said could not find it (her license). At that point, ACI Jan Feldman asked her to write a statement stating that she no longer wanted to be licensed and she stated, “I am not signing or writing anything without my lawyer, I am done with you.” ACI Jan Feldman then informed the licensee that we would have to consider this as a refusal and that we would send her a copy of the report by certified mail. The licensee walked away. At 10:42 am we left the facility in an expeditious manner.

Marsha Cox wasn’t “done with this crap” because she was tired of getting written up for violations. She’s been written up for violations for years. However, thanks to the USDA making her inspection records public, and HSUS listing her operation in Missouri’s Dirty Dozen, all the dirty little secrets about her organization have been made public, for the world to see.

When Inspector Feldman visited David and Gloria Still’s business in Purdy, Missouri, David Stills actually became verbally abusive:

As we began the inspection of the third building exterior, the licensee (husband) became angry and challenging. When a non-compliant item (holes dug by the dog under a ramp) was pointed out, Mr. Still made the comment dogs dig. I agreed with him and asked Mrs. Still if she had some gravel around to address the problem. I mentioned that due to the location and deepness of the hole by the ramp, it was possible for the dogs to become injured. Mr. Still became immediately indignant and challenged my statement. His tone and body stance became more aggressive and angry.

I turned to Mrs. Still and told her if he continued in this manner I would consider it interference of the inspection and we would leave. Mr. Still then said angrily, You can just leave. He yelled that he did not need us to sell their puppies. Mrs. Still just stood there. He made a couple of other comments with a tone and manner that were very angry. I explained to Mrs. Still that since Mr. Still was on the license we would be leaving and would consider this interference and a refusal to allow inspection. I told her I would send her the report with the refusal and interference and our findings up to this point by certified mail. Mr Still made several very angry comments during my conversation with Mrs. Still such as You don’t own these dogs and You don’t own this property. We left the facility at that point in time. We were unable to complete the inspection due to interference of the licensee and the potential risk to our safety.

Both Marsha Cox and the Stills are still licensed with the state, and I am in the process of pulling state records for both. I will be curious to compare state records with federal records.

Though Cox and the Stills are still licensed with the state, James Holtkamp is not. On August 24, 2010, during a USDA inspection:

The licensee was verbally abusive and threatening to the inspectors. The licensee refused to allow an inspection. The licensee was uncooperative and used profanity when yelling at the inspectors. The licensee physically grabbed at the inspector’s arm and the state highway patrol officer had to intervene.

I’ll still submit a Sunshine Law request for past records for Holtkamp, to ensure that he’s no longer an operating kennel.

There is a simple option if people don’t want to be inspected by the USDA or the state: don’t go into a business that requires these inspections. The problem is for the last several years, there’s been little or no exposure of these large scale commercial breeders. In the past, the inspectors have been too close to the people inspected, and the breeders got away with numerous violations and inadequate care of the dogs. Now, the USDA at least, and hopefully the MDA are becoming stricter about enforcement. More importantly, though, is the fact that the bad operations are being exposed.

The breeders are angry—no more dirty little secrets. Hopefully, angry enough to quit, and save the state and the federal government the time and expense of closing them down.

Chris Koster, Missouri Attorney General, has published another press release about a court injunction against an unlicensed breeder. His office states that the breeder violates several ACFA regulations:

Koster said Shirley Gilbert owns Wolfgang’s Puppies and Gee Gee’s Yorkies, a commercial breeding facility in Aurora. Department of Agriculture inspections uncovered numerous violations of the Animal Care Facilities Act. Gilbert failed to provide clean, dry bedding and wind and rain breaks to protect the dogs from the elements; failed to keep food receptacles clean and sanitized; failed to collect and remove animal waste; failed to clean and sanitize the facility or to provide adequate space for the dogs; failed to provide housing that protected the animals from injury; and failed to provide adequate veterinary care to the animals, many of which had matted coats and one that had severe eye complications.

The Attorney General’s office states that he’s obtained a temporary restraining order prohibiting the breeder from selling dogs, but selling dogs without a license is a Class A misdemeanor. Why, on earth, was this woman not charged with a crime?

In addition, the press release details horrendous conditions for the dogs, but nothing, nothing, about rescuing the dogs or removing the dogs from what sounds to be extremely dangerous conditions. In an article in the News-Leader, we find out that the breeder is allowed to keep the 22 adult dogs and 12 puppies until the June 10 hearing…and possibly later.

Rather than make things better for dogs, the recent actions to gut Proposition B have left things in worse shape then what we had even before Proposition B. AG Koster, this is nothing to brag about.

If you agree, contact the Attorney General’s office, and tell Koster to do more than just file a restraining order when dogs lives are at risk.

CBS has announced that the Missouri Attorney General has closed down S & S Family Puppies in Milan, Missouri. S & S Family Puppies was the top of the list in the Missouri Dirty Dozen report.

I can’t find any official announcement at the Attorney General’s web site. Nor is there a history of this item being taken to court. In fact, the news may not be as good as it sounds, as noted in a comment to the CBS story (update Did find information on court case, and copy of consent decree, as noted at end of story):

WAIT. THE FACILITY IS SHUT DOWN BUT THE DOGS ARE NOT SAFE! THEY ARE JUST BEING MOVED. READ BELOW (from today’s HSUS email). It’s disgusting.

The Stephensons’ dogs, however, are not going to rescue groups or shelters where they could be adopted into loving families. Instead, the state is allowing them to be transferred or sold to other commercial breeding facilities. Forty of the dogs are scheduled to be sold to the highest bidder this Saturday at the Southwest Kennel Auction in Wheaton, Mo.

And because only the Stephensons were mentioned in the Attorney General’s statement, we suspect many of these dogs may be transferred to a second kennel operated by another family member, Brandi Cheney. USDA records list Stephenson and Cheney as co-owners of S & S Family Puppies. In fact, last year several aggrieved consumers sued Diana Stephenson and Cheney under the Missouri consumer protection law. The consumers alleged that Stephenson and Cheney sold them sick puppies but misled them into believing the puppies were healthy. A copy of the plaintiffs’ complaint was sent to Attorney General Koster.

Nevertheless, as detailed in our March 2011 Dirty Dozen update, Cheney recently obtained a USDA license for a new kennel, called Circle B Farms, which has also been cited for severe animal care violations.

Thus, the surviving dogs likely won’t have a chance at a better life, but merely a life in another puppy mill. This is unacceptable. Puppy mill operators who have repeatedly violated both state and federal laws should not be permitted to move or sell their surviving “stock” to other puppy mill operators. The dogs have already suffered untold trauma and should not be transferred to another breeding facility, especially considering that local and national animal groups are prepared to help these dogs. It’s time they find a loving home.

(Comment quote from a story at HSUS)

Southwest Auction is having a consignment kennel auction today, and if you look down towards the end of the page you’ll find, in small print, a listing for Diana Stephenson, the co-owner of S & S. I notice that, unlike other auctions, there is no note from the auction house about what a good breeder this breeder is; no testimony from the kennel vet. More disconcerting is that the number of dogs listed does not account for the number of dogs S & S had at their last inspection.

(Missouri MDA inspections)

I’m greatly disturbed to hear that the person listed as co-owner of S & S, Brandi Cheney, obtained new USDA and MDA licenses. The USDA inspections for this newly licensed kennel already show violations. Cheney has also sold puppies under another name, CC Puppies, with a different license, but the same types of violations. By the license fee Cheney paid for her newest license, she has a significant number of dogs, which supports the HSUS statement that all that’s happened is that the dogs have been shifted from one of the owners to the other, and this “victory” is nothing more than a sham.

(Note the reference to a second license in the recent USDA inspection report for S & S Family Puppies. Also note that both the Stephensons and Cheney have been sued by puppy buyers.)

update I did find a story on the court judgment. It is a consent decree, which means the Stephenson’s agreed to it. But look at the requirements: the facility is required to transfer dogs to another ACFA licensed facility. That’s it. Both Director Hagler and AG Koster brag about the outcome, but all that’s happened is that the poor dogs have been transferred from one puppy mill to another. This is not a victory.

Second update KMOV covers the fact that Stephensons can keep the profits from the dog auction. The story also mentions the fact that the breeders’ daughter is still licensed and able to “buy” her parents’ dogs.

A sham. A total sham. That’s what the “modification” of Proposition B is giving us: a mockery of a law.