Breeders I want your professional opinion on this Proposition.

[RachelandSadie]

Please read this IN DETAIL before responding and after carefully considering your breeding habits and this proposition tell me your opinions on whether it is reasonable and a good thing to support or not. I am currently in favor of this but there are a few things in the section about adequate space that might make this a little blown out of proportion. what do you guys think?

SOS, Missouri - Elections: 2010 Approved Initiative Petitions

Vote or on your thread please.

[Cares4Dogs]

Originally Posted by RachelandSadie

Please read this IN DETAIL before responding and after carefully considering your breeding habits and this proposition tell me your opinions on whether it is reasonable and a good thing to support or not. I am currently in favor of this but there are a few things in the section about adequate space that might make this a little blown out of proportion. what do you guys think?

SOS, Missouri - Elections: 2010 Approved Initiative Petitions

Vote or on your thread please.

Seems to me they are wanting to place bare minimum conditions on breeder dogs. I mean com'on--requiring at least one meal a day and one vet visit a year?? They can still live in cages so long as they arent stacked and have enough room to stretch?? I cant swallow the idea of only feeding a breeding female one meal a day....sick to even think about it.

Doesnt solve any puppy mill problems. I didnt read the entire thing....just skimmed.

[yorkielady06]

First of all 50 breeding dogs:eek
One meal a day
Just those first few lines was all I needed!! I chose not to read the rest OMG
That would be a puppy mill if you ask me. I have2 pet yorkies, 6 breeding dogs and sometimes feel overwhelmed with that.I spent 10 K in 2009 and 9700.00 in 2008 in vet bills alone..lol...I cannot imagine 50!! What the heck would someone want 50 for besides millers....geesh.
To me that is there for puppy millers to get them maybe to at least give the dogs minimal care in my opinion. If that is what it is for then it should have already been on the books.

[Teresamag]

I've been studying this bill for some time. In my opinion this is a poorly written bill who will do more damage than good. In fact, I feel strongly enough about it I have a page against it on my website, my Facebook page, and I've emailed all of my pet families living in Missouri asking them to vote NO for this bill. I am not the only person against this bill - AKC and a whole host of other reputable organizations are against this bill.
I do breed and have bred Yorkies for 12+ years in Missouri - what most people don't realize is that many of these requirements are ALREADY the law here. You can find the laws that we LICENSED breeders are required to follow under the Missouri Department of Agriculture website. The problem in Missouri and other states stems from unlicensed substandard breeders. We should not be passing other bills to correct the problem and spending tons of our taxpayer money (estimated to be over $1 million!)when we should focus on enforcing the laws currently in place and making those unlicensed breeders come into compliance. Missouri already has a program working on this called Operation Bark Alert where people can report unlicensed breeders in Missouri (do a web search to find out more info). It is currently a misdemeanor to be breeding dogs in Missouri if you have over 3 breeding females and are not licensed. When they are licensed they have to follow the laws already in place. I have other problems with this bill I will outline below. I may have to make serveral posts to cover these objections to the bill.

[Teresamag]

Here are my objections to this initative:
1). This ballot initiative was brought by HSUS who is NOT a friend to breeders. No matter what you might think HSUS spends tons more money legislating bills to reduce our rights and on helping animals. This is directly from their budgets and information that can be found online. (Check out humanewatch.org) According to their records they spend less than 1/2 of 1% on helping animals and the rest of their budget goes to advertising, lobbying, and helping pass bills.
2). What is a "Puppy Mill" - there is no official defination. While we each have our own ideas about what a puppy mill is we will all disagree. Everyone wants to prevent puppy mills (me included) but having this language in the bill will influence people to vote yes for the bill without reading or taking the time to understand it.
3). Another objection I have to this bill is that they are going to mandate how often I breed my dogs. Since when have we let the government mandate this, how many lawmakers understand breeding issues? Shouldn't the dog's owner consult their vet/reproductive specialist about breeding timing? Dr. Hutch tells us now that it's actually healthier for a dogs uterus to be breed several times in a row and then spayed. Breeders should already be thinking of the dogs best interest and I shouldn't have to listen to a law passed by the non-breeding public that may not understand all the issues.
4). Under the constitution I am allowed "property", I love my dogs but they are considered my property. Why is the government going to tell me I can only have so many dogs? Will they someday tell my neighbor next door he can only have so many beef cattle, or the lady down the street who shows horses she can only have so many? I will never have that many dogs, the ones I have now keep me very busy - thank you very much . I just don't think there should be a # limit, I think we should have laws on how animals should be taken care of, not a limit. I've seen people with 3 dogs neglect them and I have seen large commercial kennels where the dogs were well taken care of (I don't agree with having that many dogs - but feel it's their right as long as the animals well taken care of). How many breeders have co0owned dogs? The count will include your co-owned dogs even if they don't live with you and you are not responsible for their day to day care.
5). Someone mentioned food being mandated once a day - this is actually less than what the law already is. The current law says at least twice a day with clean water always available. Why go back to less?
6). Vet care mandated "for ANY ILLNESS OR INJURY". How many of you breeders have albon or other meds for diarrhea at home and give to your puppies if they have a problem. How many give medications at home for any reason if your pet is mildly ill, give aspirin or meds for a slight injury? This will no longer be allowed - you will have to make a vet visit for every illness and/or injury. By the way, humane euthanasia by a vet is already the law

[Teresamag]

7). Constant and unfettered access.... this is probably my most hated thing about this bill. This means we will not be able to place our dogs in crates or ex-pens. How many of you use crates, ex-pens, puppy pens to keep your girls away from intact males, separate dogs that don't get along, grow coat for show, or to keep them safe when you cant watch them or to help with potty training? You will no longer be able to use these. Also, how many of you keep your momma's in a puppy pen to keep the temp stable, without drafts, and in a quiet area? This will be "out". The mom will need access to go out whenever she wants, can you say cold drafts on fragile newborn puppies? Puppies accidently getting outside in weather too hot or too cold for them? Temp ranges are already covered in existing law too.
8). And lastly - this bill ONLY covers Breeders who sell pets. It doesn't cover breeders who breed hunting dogs to sell for "hunting", I have seen huge hunting kennels. It also does not cover pet stores, animal shelters, dog trainers, or hoarders. So, the bill is to protect puppies from breeders but not from pet stores or shelters - then it's ok to put them on wire and in cages? I don't think so.
9). Who is going to inspect breeders to make sure they are following the law? The Missouri Department of Agriculture is overwhelmed already (why can't we give them more money to do their job of making sure we are following the laws ALREADY in place?), are we going to create another branch of the government to inspect? How much will that cost? Will HSUS volunteer to inspect? (that would be a nightmare when they want to shut down ALL breeding).

I know there are many who will disagree with me but I stand by my convictions as a Missouri resident and a Missouri licensed breeder. This is a bad bill that was written by HSUS representatives in the hope that naming it the Puppy Mill Cruelty Prevention Act would make it easier to pass because all people want to prevent cruelty. However this bill is poorly written and can actually harm the reputatable and ethical breeders who are already following the laws already in place, it can harm my dogs! This bill will not cover the "puppy millers" who are not licensed - why would they follow this law when they don't follow the laws already in place?
Please do more research online before you vote yes. AKC has a position on their website against it and a ton of other groups have come out in oppostion of this bill. I am voting NO and asking everyone I know to vote NO.
Teresa
Magnum Yorkies

[Teresamag]

[QUOTE=Teresamag;3272575]Here are my objections to this initative:
1). This ballot initiative was brought by HSUS who is NOT a friend to breeders. No matter what you might think HSUS spends tons more money legislating bills to reduce our rights than they do on helping animals. This is directly from their budgets and information that can be found online. (Check out humanewatch.org) According to their records they spend less than 1/2 of 1% on helping animals and the rest of their budget goes to advertising, lobbying, and helping pass bills.

Fixed a typo

[bellemarie]

i wouldnt support it if i had the chance...
even though different authorities try to make things better, with little understanding of what the dogs actually need they only seem to go from bad to worse! i got turned down for a renewal of my council breeding lisence because i do not have an outdoor breeding shed... FOR YORKIES!?! it rains almost 24/7 and if the temp reaches 20C we prepare for a heatwave!
the case is being re-evaluated by the dog warden, but thats a rediculous demand; fair enough if it was rotties, thats kinda understandable, but for a toy breed?
sorry, i know i got a bit off point, but Teresa said it perfectly!

[Teresamag]

Here is a list of those groups I know of against Prop B, they have released statements telling their members to vote NO. There are probably other groups against it - these are the ones I know.

AKC (see AKC’s response to this bill on their website), Missouri Pet Breeders Association (Magnum Yorkies is a member), Missouri Pet Association, Missouri Federation of Animal Owners, Missourians for Animal Care, MFA Incorporated, Missouri Agribusiness Association, Missouri Cattlemen’s Association, Missouri Corn Growers Association, Missouri Dairy Association, Missouri Egg Producers, Missouri Equine Council, Missouri Farm Bureau, Missouri Livestock Marketing Association, Missouri Pork Association, Missouri Soybean Association, The Poultry Federation. I’m sure there are even more groups against this bill, I just may not know about them.

If you would like to see what else I have written about this bill check out my Facebook page by doing a search for Magnum Yorkies or check out my website.

Teresa
Magnum Yorkies

[RachelandSadie]

thank you so much. you have put this into much more perspective that i did not have. i wanted to hear from ethical breeders to learn more about how this really would effect you all as you are the ones it hurts/helps (hurts seems like) and me as the eneducated consumer will not understand as fully without our information.

thank you!!

[Jaxx]

Thanks for explaining the details of this bill.
I will be voting NO on Prop B !!

[Jaxx]

Vote NO on Prop B

[Teresamag]

Not only is the AKC against Missouri's Proposition B but now the Missouri Veterinary Medical Association has puplished their objections to this bill and are telling people to VOTE NO. You can see their statements on their website at About the MVMA . Go to the website and click on the link that says "How To Pick A Great Puppy From A Reputable Breeder", good information.

Teresa

[yorkiegirl2]

Here is another site to look at to help you decide if you want to
Vote YES or No on PROP B.
Facts | YES! on Prop B

I plan to vote YES on prop B and These are my reasons why.
If the breeders and the USDA had done their jobs and upheld the currant laws set down by the AWA we would not be here today discussing this issue.
Breeders for far to long have gotten away with substandard care and lining their greedy pockets.
Repeating violations after violations with nothing being done but a slap on the wrist.
And the dogs are the ones who have been left to suffered and die because of it.
As a Missourian I am sick of my state being known as the Puppy Mill Capital of America.
These out of control breeders have given all of who have done right by the dogs and are breeding correctly and humanly a BIG BLACK EYE.
And while the bill may not be the greatest it is better then no bill at all.
Because as it stand now the current way of doing things.. IS NOT WORKING !.
If injecting a little fear to follow the regulations or face the consequences with heavy fines or jail time, then maybe breeders will think twice about the way they raise dogs.
Most of the breeders who are already breeding correctly the bill will not effect them and those who are not will have a year to either come in to compliance or get out of business.
Not to pass this bill mean we as Missourians are sending a clear message that it’s OK for people to continue on with the status quo to mistreat and abuse the dogs in their care.
I don’t care how you look at it …. it’s not RIGHT !!
It’s time for people to stand up and say enough is enough !!!!

A few other points that have been brought up is the argument that "my puppies will be on cold concrete floors and get sick". That is not true. You will still have your whelping areas and temporary holding areas where your mothers can properly care for their babies and babies can be kept out of harms way from elements and disease. That is something people have read into it. A whelping area is not a housing area. It states HOUSING. That means where your dog spends a majority of their time, not where you would have them for medical reasons or whelping.


Another one is Term UNFETTERD meaning not bound by shackles and chains.
I take this to mean you can not keep a dog on a chain, the dog will have to be kept it in a pen/kennel type enclosure.
Personally I am not a fan of seeing any dog chained to trees, junk cars.. etc.

[Teresamag]

Yorkiegirl2 and I are actually friends so I know she won't think I'm "picking" a fight with her . We do disagree about Missouri's proposed Proposition B but agree that something needs to be done about horrible breeders. However, I don't think this bill is the best thing to stop them since it only affects licensed breeders not the illegal ones currently giving us good breeders a bad name in Missouri. I've read the actual language of the bill and it doesn't say anything about whelping areas, I believe the interpertation of this part of the bill will be up to the individual inspector which could be bad, I wish this bill was written differently. I'm including a "fact" sheet below that I received by email the other day as a thinking tool......
Teresa


FACT: Proposition B would have a devastating financial impact on Missouri residents, families and small businesses, and would immediately eliminate countless jobs throughout Missouri.

FACT: Proposition B targets only legal, licensed, breeders, attacks personal property rights by limiting the number of animals a breeder may have, regardless of the quality of their operation, and it does nothing to stop or regulate unlicensed, substandard breeders. (The Truth about Prop B - Alliance for Truth)

FACT: The primary proponent and most substantial financial contributor of Proposition B is the HSUS, Humane Society of the United States, whose stated goal is the abolition of pet ownership. They are also opposed to hunting, fishing, farming and animal agriculture. (HumaneWatch)

FACT: The HSUS is not an animal care group and has no affiliation with any local animal shelters. In fact, they are Washington-based animal extremist organization with ties to radical animal extremist groups like PETA, Greenpeace, the Animal Liberation Front, the Sierra club, the Earth Liberation Front and many others. (HumaneWatch)

FACT: Of the $2.3 million raised to promote Proposition B, only 3% ($73,000) has come from Missouri residents and groups. The remainder has come from affiliated national groups and organizations with radical animal rights agendas. (www.columbiamissourian.com/stories - 10/1/10)

FACT: Proposition B would add more federal government regulation to an industry that is already regulated and inspected by the United States Department of Agriculture/APHIS and the Missouri Department of Agriculture.

FACT: Proposition B is opposed by the American Kennel Club, the Missouri Veterinary Medical Association, Missouri Farm Bureau, Missouri Pet Breeders Association, MoFED, the Missouri Federation of Animal Owners, the Center for Consumer Freedom, the Alliance for Truth, Missouri Family Network, the Professional Kennel Club of Missouri, Joe The Plumber, The Missouri Tea Party, The Tea Party Patriots, and countless other organizations who have studied how this bill will have a substantial and far-reaching negative impact on Missouri residents and businesses.