USDA inspections and enforcement of standards have been highly controversial for years.

Many organizations have documented the USDA’s poor performance. This is not just in the opinion of humane officers, animal protection groups, or others who have witnessed non-compliance. USDA inspectors and federal auditors have also tried to voice concern.

In 1985, 1992, 1995, 2005 and recently in May 2010, five major audits were conducted of the USDA’s Animal Welfare Program. Each audit identified multiple deficiencies by the USDA-APHIS, and these deficiencies were not corrected. In fact, the Inspector General cites the “lack of clear National guidance.”

For a link to the 2010 and 2005 audits and discussion of USDA inspections in Minnesota, click here.

A 'hands-off' approach

It has been found (through federal audits) that the USDA has created a culture where inspectors are encouraged and trained to allow breeders to correct their behavior, rather than to fine or cite for noncompliance. Per review of inspection reports, multiple chances for correction are given, resulting in no punitive action taken.

This 'hands-off' approach contributes to a lack of enforcement of standards, resulting in continued animal abuse and suffering. Breeders are subjected to limited consequences.

Inspection reports can be obtained through the Freedom of Information Act. As a citizen, you may request the inspection reports about specific USDA-breeders in Minnesota.

Need for state involvement

Lax federal enforcement (by the USDA-APHIS) and the need for State involvement was confirmed in an August 2009 declaration (AWA No. D-09-0139) by the Eastern Regional Director of Animal Care, APHIS-USDA, Elizabeth Goldentyer (regarding a Minnesota dog breeder, Kathy Bauck).

States Goldentyer: "One reason APHIS will cooperate with States is because agency resources are limited and APHIS can inspect facilities only a limited number of times. . . . In addition, it can, in some circumstances, be difficult for APHIS inspectors to discover instances of animal cruelty or torture. For example, APHIS inspectors will typically only visit a facility once or twice a year, and such inspections are almost always dependent upon the licensee's cooperation and assistance. Thus, APHIS frequently cannot detect or document what happens at facilities when no APHIS inspector is present, or what happens at facilities when a licensee is uncooperative and/or refuses to grant APHIS access to all or part of a licensee's facility. For these and other reasons, APHIS, as authorized by the AWA, will offten cooperate with State officials in carrying out the purposes of the AWA."

Whistleblower cases

Below are links to viewpoints about USDA behavior, in regards to whistleblower cases. These cases deal primarily with animals for use in research.

• USDA Inspector Files Whistleblower Complaint with OSC
• USDA subverts Animal Welfare Act in whistleblower protection case