Serious violations of Animal Welfare Act doesn’t mean quick removal

CEDAR RAPIDS - Dog breeders in Iowa who repeatedly do not comply with the Animal Welfare Act are allowed to continue raising and breeding dogs, sometimes in unsanitary and unsafe conditions, while federal inspectors give the cited breeders time to correct violations.

An IowaWatch review of inspection reports found it often takes many U.S. Department of Agriculture Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) non-compliance citations - issued for problems posing the most serious risk to an animal's health during inspections - before the agency decides to take enforcement action against the facilities it has identified as substandard.

'Even when the USDA does go out and writes people up, there is just no enforcement effort to put these people out of business,” said Bob Baker, executive director of the Missouri Alliance for Animal Legislation and a nationally recognized animal-rights expert.

At the federal level, animals may remain in these conditions because the Animal Welfare Act, enacted to protect animal health, requires that the USDA give facility operators time to make corrections before enforcement action is taken, USDA spokeswoman Tanya Espinosa said.

Iowa law allows for confiscating animals - but only at the end of legal proceedings.

'They have legal rights, and we have to get through the process before any confiscation could occur,” said Dustin VandeHoef, an Iowa Department of Agriculture and Land Stewardship spokesman.

Federal inspectors said they have increased their inspections at dog breeding facilities after the Office of Inspector General issued a scathing 2010 review on APHIS.

But even after that report was published situations continued to exist in Iowa in which dogs lived in unclean or unsafe conditions while breeders received several chances to correct problems, it was revealed in interviews and in documents reviewed by IowaWatch.

One of the most notorious examples is the case of Iowa dog breeder Debra Pratt's facility in the New Sharon area, in Mahaska County. From Aug. 10, 2010, until June 21, 2013, inspection reports indicate Pratt operated a facility that consistently housed dogs in dangerous conditions, despite being cited for violations during that period and being given time to correct them.

Pratt's facility was shut down.

Other examples in USDA inspection reports IowaWatch examined during a four-month investigation include:

l Julie and Carolyn Arends, whose Julies Jules near Jewell, consistently had substandard conditions for animal health from 2010 into 2013.

l Gary Felts of Kingsley, who four months after being cited Nov. 19, 2013, for having rusted surfaces, dirt and grime in facilities that housed animals, was cited for the same substandard conditions on March 26, 2014, while not having adequate records of the dogs on hand.

l Karen Baker of Redding, who from February 2011 to October 2012 was allowed to operate a facility that USDA inspectors cited for unsanitary conditions that included a buildup of dog and rodent feces. APHIS records through June 3, 2014, showed Baker's facility remained in what was rated semi-poor conditions.

Iowa has 249 USDA Animal Care Breeder/Dealer licensed facilities and most have good inspection records.

The Ag Department's VandeHoef said state agriculture and land stewardship officials seek legal action against breeders suspected of violating the law and work with animal shelters and human societies to house confiscated animals.

CONSTANT CARE REQUIRED

An IowaWatch analysis of APHIS inspection data, from a public database on its website and covering Sept. 27, 2010, through May 30, 2014, revealed that 7 percent of dog breeding facility inspections during that time resulted in direct non-compliance citations.

During that time, APHIS inspected 6,840 USDA-licensed dog breeding facilities and cited 483 direct non-compliance issues that pose the most serious risk to the animal's health. Only 24 breeders were cited for having four or more direct non-compliance issues.

APHIS brought enforcement decisions on 16 USDA licensed dog breeders.

In early 2013, David and Joane Cline of Sully were cited for having animals with dental problems and skin matting two months after being cited in December 2012 for the same problem again, except this time more animals had health problems, inspectors said.

Conditions at the Clines' facility improved to the point where they had no violations in a November 2013 inspection, nine months after the previous inspection. But a June 2013 inspection was scratched because no legal adult was available to assist, records show.

'We keep the veterinarian documentation for the inspector, but the inspectors don't pay any attention to that. They just tell us to do as good as we can,” Joane Cline said.

The Clines have a small outfit, with 23 dogs this past summer.

'In the summer time, (the dogs) have personal fans, but it's not air-conditioned. And we do have the doors open all the way around. …

And then in the wintertime we put straw in and we close the barn doors and leave the lights on. If it gets too cold we put blankets in front of them.”

l This story was produced by Iowa Center for Public Affairs Journalism-IowaWatch.org, a non-profit, online news website that collaborates with Iowa news organizations to produce explanatory and investigative reporting. Lyle Muller of IowaWatch assisted with this report.