UNITED STATES INSPECTOR GENERALS REPORT -
MAY 2010 - USDA COMMERCIAL DOG BREEDING INDUSTRY - NEWPORT BEACH CITIZENS WANT BAN ON PET STORE PUPPIES
Case finding: Lack of Veterinary care, dog's leg left seven days rotting away flesh down to the bone.
EXACT
PHOTO-EXAMPLEEX1. At a facility in Oklahoma with 83 adult dogs, AC cited the
breeder for a total of 20 violations (including 1 repeat and 1 direct) during 5
inspections from April 2006 to December 2007. The direct violation concerned
the lack of adequate veterinary care for three dogs withhair loss over their
entire bodies and raw, irritated spots on their skin.27 Despite the continuing
violations, AC did not take enforcement actions due to its lenient practices
against repeat violators.
During our visit to the facility in July 2008, AC cited the breeder for another 11 violations (including 1 repeat and 3 directs). One of the direct violations involved a dog that had been bitten by another dog. The first dog was left untreated for at least 7 days, which resulted in the flesh around the wound rotting away to the bone (see figure 2).
Figure 2: Live Dog With Mutilated Leg
The breeder admitted the dog had been in this condition for at least 7 days. The inspector correctly required the dog to be taken to a local veterinarian who immediately euthanized it.
AC did refer the case to IES for investigation, but only after another direct violation was documented in a subsequent inspection after our visit. Based on the results of the investigation, AC recommended a stipulation. However, as of early June 2009—11 months after our visit—the violator had not yet been fined.28
Also, although AWA states that “the Secretary is authorized to cooperate with the officials of the various States . . . in carrying out the purpose of [AWA],”29 AC did not establish procedures to forward animal cruelty cases to these officials. In this case, AC did not notify the State of Oklahoma (which has first-offense felony laws for animal cruelty) of the inhumane treatment the dog received.
During our visit to the facility in July 2008, AC cited the breeder for another 11 violations (including 1 repeat and 3 directs). One of the direct violations involved a dog that had been bitten by another dog. The first dog was left untreated for at least 7 days, which resulted in the flesh around the wound rotting away to the bone (see figure 2).
Figure 2: Live Dog With Mutilated Leg
The breeder admitted the dog had been in this condition for at least 7 days. The inspector correctly required the dog to be taken to a local veterinarian who immediately euthanized it.
AC did refer the case to IES for investigation, but only after another direct violation was documented in a subsequent inspection after our visit. Based on the results of the investigation, AC recommended a stipulation. However, as of early June 2009—11 months after our visit—the violator had not yet been fined.28
Also, although AWA states that “the Secretary is authorized to cooperate with the officials of the various States . . . in carrying out the purpose of [AWA],”29 AC did not establish procedures to forward animal cruelty cases to these officials. In this case, AC did not notify the State of Oklahoma (which has first-offense felony laws for animal cruelty) of the inhumane treatment the dog received.
