Quote:
Originally Posted by yorkietalkjilly  I have heard more than one shelter or rescue organization tell me that the AKC & well-heeled, influential movers & shakers in the dog fancy always stop legislation that would make a dent on puppy mills for fear it will affect them some way, using the slippery-slope argument. But I really think that true legislative intent would be considered if ever respectable, truly reputable breeders, who are humane & kind to their dogs, were being harrassed by some beurocrat from an oversight agency for keeping their Malamutes outside too long during play, training & exercise for an event. That breeder's state or even U. S. senator could step in there. I've used both when I needed to do so. But we have got to start getting some laws in place that hit puppy-millers hard. We have to start somewhere. I tend to disagree with AKC on this one but my mind is still open. |
They can't have it both ways. They are against puppy mills but they are more afraid to let the legislation through that would stop these pig pens. I can understand being concerned about some language in the bill that they may feel is not accurate enough to protect them but there are ways of dealing with that. It's just wrong to put the welfare of dogs trapped in puppy mills and other inhumane situations beneath their concern for their kennels. The bills are not aimed at clean well run kennels; they are aimed at suffering animals. If their kennels are legal and humane then why stop the state from helping other animals? Do they really think the police are going to bust an AKC conformation or agility show? Or are they concerned about having their kennel inspected? We can't afford the upkeep of the high kill shelters run by the state and local governments! That is why thousands of animals are killed daily! It's one thing to pass some paper legislation but it is a whole other thing to get it enforced.