Proposed new aphis regulation

[magicgenie]

Originally Posted by lisaly

Like other members on YT, I wanted a baby who is healthy and who was given a lot of love and care by her breeder. I ended up getting a three year old retired female who had been shown and bred by a show breeder who loved my little girl dearly. Katie was given so much love, attention, exercise, and training by her breeder, and it shows in her confidence, special disposition, and unbelievably wonderful personality. I am so very grateful that Katie's breeder trusted me with her baby, and I am so lucky to I was able to get her from a breeder who raised Katie as part of her family. I fear that breeders like Katie's would be affected by this legislation, breeders who put their heart and soul into raising healthy, well-adjusted and very loved babies. I signed the petition a couple of weeks ago and would very much like to support breeders who are devoted to their babies.

I'm sure your breeder appreciates your support too!

[magicgenie]

Originally Posted by yorkietalkjilly

Breeders are apparently going to have to give up some things they now enjoy to get some needed change and that includes charging more money for dogs. Does anybody know of legislation our reputable breeders are willing to accept since what is on the books now - current laws and the present ways are not working?

Prices will definitely have to go up, which isn't necessarily a bad thing. You're already seeing fewer good breeders, and no great ones rising up. Many have already started giving up their dogs, so you're right about them giving up things they've enjoyed.
Some of us feel there already were perfectly adequate laws on the books and would prefer to see more resources directed to enforcing those than to adding more laws that will be haphazardly applied.

[yorkietalkjilly]

Originally Posted by magicgenie

Prices will definitely have to go up, which isn't necessarily a bad thing. You're already seeing fewer good breeders, and no great ones rising up. Many have already started giving up their dogs, so you're right about them giving up things they've enjoyed.
Some of us feel there already were perfectly adequate laws on the books and would prefer to see more resources directed to enforcing those than to adding more laws that will be haphazardly applied.

So counties would need to hire more inspectors or AC personnel to shut down the puppy mills in our areas in the US to do this? So we'd all need a bond proposal to pass to increase revenues to cover the increased hires' salary/insurance locally vs. this bill's inspectors which would be federally funded? Is that right? Of would this legislation be a county burden, too?

[Nancy1999]

Originally Posted by gemy

Nancy yes I have sold a pup "sight" unseen prior to the sale. Of course the person saw internet pictures of the parents and pup. They did not come to my home to see the pups. We did meet at a show some 1000 miles distant from my home.

And I have now read the AWA in terms of what is needed to abide to the "full" letter of their regulations. And quite simply a breeder who wants to raise their pups and dogs in home, could not satisfy their requirements.

You can't sanitize a Home! You will have sharp edges. And to tell me that swimming, and treadmill work, does not count as "exercise" WTF?

I'm not going to keep my dogs to just one section of my home, in their crates for the most part, in order to fulfill AWA guidelines. Plus recent research has indicated no slip flooring along with other things, has a positive effect for puppies not developing or developing less severe hip dysplasia.

I do not support this change in regulation at all. My belief is that it will affect many small hobby breeders to their, and eventually to the public's detriment.

Gail, I don't think you are still understanding the bill. It says: You met the person face to face at a show. So you each got some sense of the other's character.
Q. How will this affect retailers who sell their
animals to buyers in face-to-face transactions at a
location other than their own premises?
A. The proposed rule is designed to close a loophole
in the current regulations that allows pet animals to be
sold sight-unseen, without any oversight by the public
or APHIS. Pet animal retailers who sell their animals
to their customers in face-to-face transactions at a
location other than their own premises are subject to
some degree of public oversight and therefore are not
the focus of this proposed rule and would not need to
obtain a license.

Where does it say you must "sanitize you home?" Again, I think you are believing the propaganda sites. Have you read this? http://www.aphis.usda.gov/publicatio...l_pets_faq.pdf

[Nancy1999]

Originally Posted by magicgenie

Prices will definitely have to go up, which isn't necessarily a bad thing. You're already seeing fewer good breeders, and no great ones rising up. Many have already started giving up their dogs, so you're right about them giving up things they've enjoyed.
Some of us feel there already were perfectly adequate laws on the books and would prefer to see more resources directed to enforcing those than to adding more laws that will be haphazardly applied.

Again, why would this affect a reputable breeder? Reputable breeders don't sell their dogs over the internet sight unseen. There are NO laws that cover people selling directly over the internet, so how are there already enough?

[Nancy1999]

Originally Posted by yorkietalkjilly

So counties would need to hire more inspectors or AC personnel to shut down the puppy mills in our areas in the US to do this? So we'd all need a bond proposal to pass to increase revenues to cover the increased hires' salary/insurance locally vs. this bill's inspectors which would be federally funded? Is that right? Of would this legislation be a county burden, too?

Again, there are no laws that cover breeders who sell directly over the internet. With this law a breeder who has over 4 breeding females, and sells over the internet without meeting the puppy buyers will have to have a license, the same as those breeders who sell to pet stores and brokers. Why shouldn't the need a license if those breeders who sell to pet stores need a license? The worse puppy mills of all are run by unlicensed breeders who sell directly to the public, no law covers them! The breeders will have to pay for their licenses.

[yorkietalkjilly]

Well, we've all got to give up some things we now enjoy about the way it is in order to try to help dogs stacked in filthy pens in astounding numbers and totally ignored except for their reproductive prowess. I'll be willing to pay more taxes, wait to get a dog from a breeder, have a less perfect dog for way more money - whatever as we just can't keep letting the forgotten ones keep on being the last ones to get what they want or need. If the dog-buying public is going to have to get slammed and it results in fewer breeders operating, is that a price we just can't pay? Or is it all just hopeless and we have to accept the status quo? And live with the horror stories and keep our mouths shut because no one will accept less freedom or rights or sales or oversight than exist now?

[caw]

Originally Posted by Nancy1999

Again, why would this affect a reputable breeder? Reputable breeders don't sell their dogs over the internet sight unseen. There are NO laws that cover people selling directly over the internet, so how are there already enough?

As long as the dogs can be raised in the home.. I agree with you. I don't see why a license would drive prices sky high. If it does....regular folks will just do what regular folk did long ago (like the Scott's did when they started the yorkie line)..yep..regular folk will start new, affordable breeds.

[concretegurl]

Its not an internet sale that would concern me its like Gemy said meeting a breeder at a shw and say years later they are on one sie of the country then I come up on their wait list...can they no longer sen a pup via Currier?

I have to travel across the country with my fam, okay ifthat is so but s that what it now reuires.

[concretegurl]

Just a thought why cant a up mill then use a mock home yo display and sell hundreds of pups from?

They can purchase from individual breeders transport as they already do have a compliant home and resale there no part of this stops that senario...and a broker was just outes in SF, CA for this, she was over the city limit numbers multiple times.

[caw]

Originally Posted by concretegurl

Its not an internet sale that would concern me its like Gemy said meeting a breeder at a shw and say years later they are on one sie of the country then I come up on their wait list...can they no longer sen a pup via Currier?

I have to travel across the country with my fam, okay ifthat is so but s that what it now reuires.

Well, now, this is a good point.

[Nancy1999]

Originally Posted by caw

As long as the dogs can be raised in the home.. I agree with you. I don't see why a license would drive prices sky high. If it does....regular folks will just do what regular folk did long ago (like the Scott's did when they started the yorkie line)..yep..regular folk will start new, affordable breeds.

Yes, dogs can still be raised in the homes, after all that's where they will be living when they are sold. I don't see why this would change the prices of dogs, the licensing fee is only $30.00. The mills would have to bring their kennels up to a certain minimum standard, and that's what many of us want. We will never get rid of commercial breeders, that’s not even the goal for me, but we must ensure that those dogs are treated in a humane way.

[magicgenie]

Originally Posted by concretegurl

Just a thought why cant a up mill then use a mock home yo display and sell hundreds of pups from?

They can purchase from individual breeders transport as they already do have a compliant home and resale there no part of this stops that senario...and a broker was just outes in SF, CA for this, she was over the city limit numbers multiple times.

Puppy mills will find ways to circumvent the law, so again it's the good breeder who will be hurt the most.
My fear is the animal rights extremists, PETA, HSUS, ASPCA, who are usually behind the legislation. All breeders are bad in their minds. They won't rest until humans are no longer allowed to own pets.
I would support laws that promote good breeding practice and crush puppy mills.

[gemy]

Originally Posted by Nancy1999

Gail, I don't think you are still understanding the bill. It says: You met the person face to face at a show. So you each got some sense of the other's character.
Q. How will this affect retailers who sell their
animals to buyers in face-to-face transactions at a
location other than their own premises?
A. The proposed rule is designed to close a loophole
in the current regulations that allows pet animals to be
sold sight-unseen, without any oversight by the public
or APHIS. Pet animal retailers who sell their animals
to their customers in face-to-face transactions at a
location other than their own premises are subject to
some degree of public oversight and therefore are not
the focus of this proposed rule and would not need to
obtain a license.

(1)Where does it say you must "sanitize you home?" Again, I think you are believing the propaganda sites. Have you read this? http://www.aphis.usda.gov/publicatio...l_pets_faq.pdf

Section 3.1 of the AWA (1)


(c)Surfaces--(1) General requirements. The surfaces of housingfacilities--including houses, dens, and other furniture-type fixtures andobjects within the facility--must be constructed in a manner and made ofmaterials that allow them to be readily cleaned and sanitized, or removed orreplaced when worn or soiled. Interior surfaces and any surfaces that come incontact with dogs or cats must:
And Yes I have read the APHIS FAQ sheet; may I remind you and everyone, a FAQ is not the proposed law; but an interpretation that APHIS or if you will an explanation that APHIS has offered; what is to say if this regulation passes that "their" preliminary interpretation can't change over time????

Again I say, meeting someone at a show, buying a puppy at retail in a pet store, does NOTHING to police and or guarantee the health and good breeding of the puppy.
In my example the prospective buyer was sent all details of the parents, actually had met the sire at a show 2yrs ago, the details enable them to verify all health checks done; the face to face meeting of the puppy confirmed their choice. They did not visit my home to see how I kept my babies. It is laughable that APHIS purports to assert that a visit to a pet store, or even once to a breeders' home constitutes any real amount of oversight.

I don't know what the answer is. It truly is appalling to me that folks sell over the internet in order to bypass what-ever legal loopholes there are.
I will also say although it is a moot point to this regulation; there "should" be regulations that say any "commercial breeder" who deigns to advertise "purebred" dogs, MUST do all health checks that are required to receive a CHIC number. No health checks no LICENSE.
Nancy; there is a Huge Philosphical difference between "hobby breeders" and commercial enterprises. And that is the crux of the issue as I see it. I do not and will not keep my pups and my dogs according to AWA guidelines; which I think are hopelessly inadequate in terms of rearing, raising well bred, socialized pet companions.
It is not about the "licensing" fee at all, but about the appalling restrictions under which I would have to rear my pups!! The appalling restrictions that would force me to place a retired female, in order to make room under the regulations to have another.
I have said it once, and I will say it again, you want to "police" internet sales, then do it through the internet. Don't do it on the backs of small breeders who put their heart, their love, and their finances into breeding only the best of the best!.

[Nancy1999]

Originally Posted by concretegurl

Just a thought why cant a up mill then use a mock home yo display and sell hundreds of pups from?

They can purchase from individual breeders transport as they already do have a compliant home and resale there no part of this stops that senario...and a broker was just outes in SF, CA for this, she was over the city limit numbers multiple times.

This is intended to regulate those internet sites with one click shopping. You've seen sites with PayPal or Master card, etc.? Reputable breeders don’t place their dogs that way. The commercial breeders who sell that way have no regulations, they need no licensing and so their dogs are treated in the most inhumane ways. They are fighting this because they don’t want to be inspected, and they also don’t want anyone to know how many dogs they are selling. Most people who start a business, need some type of license, why should a dog breeder not have a license?