Allert all indiana breeders

[Nancy1999]

Originally Posted by yoursotino

I agree that rules need to be made but this bill does not do that all it does keep people like myself who has 3 females from having puppies in hopes of having one or two to show. I do not sell puppies for breeding the are all petted out. the rules that are in this bill are crazy. My contract says I will replace a puppy with another when one is available not refund money. 15 days is a long time to mess up puppy. Not all people unfortunatley do what they should when they get their puppy home. We had one that we sold that she left her and went to Dinky a Amish auction barn for the evening. Wow what a place to pick up germs. I want puppy mill shut down as much as the next person but this bill will not do that. If they would enforce the Agi restriction that all ready apply they could shut them down. Like I said before if people would do their homework and not buy from Puppymills in the first place there would be no puppy mills. i dont believe the governmant has a right to tell me how many dogs or animals I can own. As long as I take care of them. Vets should report sick or injured dogs to the correct officals this in my eyes would also me a solution. I hope I dont sound like a radical person but I just truely believe will all my heart this is bad bill. It needs to be written by people who raise dogs and show. That are not associated with petstores or puppymills.

Exactly, so you have to state which points affect the home breeder, I didn't see the part about you only being allowed to have 3 females. Can you point out the part of the bill that says this? I agree this is too low of a number, what do you think is a more appropriate number?

[Doodlebop]

Originally Posted by Nancy1999

Exactly, so you have to state which points affect the home breeder, I didn't see the part about you only being allowed to have 3 females. Can you point out the part of the bill that says this? I agree this is too low of a number, what do you think is a more appropriate number?

Chapter 7. Pet Dealers
Sec. 1. A pet dealer must maintain a log containing the:
(1) name;
(2) address;
(3) city; and
(4) state;
of the breeder and broker, if applicable, that provided each puppy sold by the pet dealer. The pet dealer must retain the log for at least two (2) years.
Sec. 2. A pet dealer must maintain veterinary records of every animal sold by the pet dealer. The pet dealer must retain the veterinary records of every animal sold or offered for sale by the
pet dealer for at least two (2) years.
Sec. 3. A pet dealer shall make the breeder log described in section 1 of this chapter available to law enforcement officials.
Sec. 4. A pet dealer shall make the veterinary records described in section 2 of this chapter available to purchasers or prospective purchasers

If you sell 5 puppies a year you are considered a "Pet Dealer"

Scenario: I have a family labrador, I want my family to experience a litter of puppies. I breeder her, sell her puppies for 100 dollars each. Since I do not have AKC papers, I did not keep any information. I am now a criminal. I have unknowingly broken the law. I can face Charges!!

How is this reasonable?

Since this Bill was snuck in under the table, there was not a lot of discussion from all points of views.

I read you think the Lemon Law is a good idea...
If ALL consumers were honest, there would not be a problem with the lemon law. Consumers can be liars too!! How is the breeder going to protect themselves against lies if the law is on their side?

Scenario:

I sell a dog to a young couple with an 8 year and a 5 year old. The puppy is dropped on its head, and immediately goes into seizures. The mother rushes the puppy to the vet, It is hooked up to IV's, tests are started, then the puppy dies. The consumer does not reveal the fact the puppy was dropped, relays to the vet that the puppy was recently purchased, and really hasn't been doing well, and now this, but refuses to do an autopsy. The vet writes diagnosis congenital defect... Not Only would I be forced to give them their money back, I would be FORCED to offer them another puppy, and pay their vet bills up to the purchase price of the puppy. So if I sold the puppy for 1000 dollars, I would be out 2000 dollars, and I may have to send another puppy to possibly endure the same demise!!

How is this reasonable?

How many times do you think this scenario or ones like it has to happen before even the best of breeders, say IT is NOT worth it??

Limited to 30 dogs?? I thought the bill was about cruel and inhumane treatment of animals? Shouldn't the conditions be examined, the number of help, and the size Buildings, all be taken into consideration before a number is given. If I go into a firehouse, there is a maximum capacity posted on the wall. That number was pulled out of thin air, limiting an amount, on what someone thought sounded like enough!!

I personally think that it is more than enough, but if someone running a awesome dog operation, where there are tons of help, school kids coming in and loving the dogs, the facilities clean , What is the problem. I am tired of small and large activists groups telling us what is politically correct, and how to think!!

[Nancy1999]

Originally Posted by Doodlebop

[B]Chapter 7. Pet Dealers
[B] Sec. 1. A pet dealer must maintain a log containing the:
(1) name;
(2) address;
(3) city; and
(4) state;
of the breeder and broker, if applicable, that provided each puppy sold by the pet dealer. The pet dealer must retain the log for at least two (2) years.
Sec. 2. A pet dealer must maintain veterinary records of every animal sold by the pet dealer. The pet dealer must retain the veterinary records of every animal sold or offered for sale by the
pet dealer for at least two (2) years.
Sec. 3. A pet dealer shall make the breeder log described in section 1 of this chapter available to law enforcement officials.
Sec. 4. A pet dealer shall make the veterinary records described in section 2 of this chapter available to purchasers or prospective purchasers

If you sell 5 puppies a year you are considered a "Pet Dealer"

Scenario: I have a family labrador, I want my family to experience a litter of puppies. I breeder her, sell her puppies for 100 dollars each. Since I do not have AKC papers, I did not keep any information. I am now a criminal. I have unknowingly broken the law. I can face Charges!!

How is this reasonable?

Since this Bill was snuck in under the table, there was not a lot of discussion from all points of views.

I read you think the Lemon Law is a good idea...
If ALL consumers were honest, there would not be a problem with the lemon law. Consumers can be liars too!! How is the breeder going to protect themselves against lies if the law is on their side?

Scenario:

I sell a dog to a young couple with an 8 year and a 5 year old. The puppy is dropped on its head, and immediately goes into seizures. The mother rushes the puppy to the vet, It is hooked up to IV's, tests are started, then the puppy dies. The consumer does not reveal the fact the puppy was dropped, relays to the vet that the puppy was recently purchased, and really hasn't been doing well, and now this, but refuses to do an autopsy. The vet writes diagnosis congenital defect... Not Only would I be forced to give them their money back, I would be FORCED to offer them another puppy, and pay their vet bills up to the purchase price of the puppy. So if I sold the puppy for 1000 dollars, I would be out 2000 dollars, and I may have to send another puppy to possibly endure the same demise!!

How is this reasonable?

How many times do you think this scenario or ones like it has to happen before even the best of breeders, say IT is NOT worth it??

Limited to 30 dogs?? I thought the bill was about cruel and inhumane treatment of animals? Shouldn't the conditions be examined, the number of help, and the size Buildings, all be taken into consideration before a number is given. If I go into a firehouse, there is a maximum capacity posted on the wall. That number was pulled out of thin air, limiting an amount, on what someone thought sounded like enough!!

I personally think that it is more than enough, but if someone running a awesome dog operation, where there are tons of help, school kids coming in and loving the dogs, the facilities clean , What is the problem. I am tired of small and large activists groups telling us what is politically correct, and how to think!!

I'm not sure if the law can be made to apply something you have done in the past, but I think your reasons for wanting to breed, "I want my family to experience a litter of puppie." are horrible, and I guess that is the type of back yard breeder, that I would really like to see stop breeding. I also don't approve of selling puppies to at such a low price, they are probably going to puppy mill breeders, or brokers. So many labs are rehomed, the buyer doesn't always understand the special needs of a lab, and it's up to the breeder to inform them of this. Finding the right home, is more important than what you charge.

Basically, I think you are saying that the law requires people who breed sell more than 5 dogs a year, to be registered. I think this is great, this doesn't mean that they need to be registered as a "commercial breeder", but just a pet dealer, and isn't that what they are, if they are selling 5 dogs a year? All it's asking is that you keep adequate records and pet records, if you are too busy for this, you shouldn't be breeding.


By the way, I asked which part of the law says that you must only keep three females.

[livingdustmops]

Originally Posted by Nancy1999

I'm not sure if the law can be made to apply something you have done in the past, but I think your reasons for wanting to breed, "I want my family to experience a litter of puppie." are horrible, and I guess that is the type of back yard breeder, that I would really like to see stop breeding. I also don't approve of selling puppies to at such a low price, they are probably going to puppy mill breeders, or brokers. So many labs are rehomed, the buyer doesn't always understand the special needs of a lab, and it's up to the breeder to inform them of this. Finding the right home, is more important than what you charge.

Basically, I think you are saying that the law requires people who breed sell more than 5 dogs a year, to be registered. I think this is great, this doesn't mean that they need to be registered as a "commercial breeder", but just a pet dealer, and isn't that what they are, if they are selling 5 dogs a year? All it's asking is that you keep adequate records and pet records, if you are too busy for this, you shouldn't be breeding.


By the way, I asked which part of the law says that you must only keep three females.

I agree with everything you said...we don't need more pets born in this country until we figure out how to find loving homes for all the surplus.

I also would like to make a comment in regards to this statement "PUPPY MILLS DO NOT OPERATE WITH AKC MEMBERSHIP OR UNDER THEIR OBSERVATION!" as this is simple not true per the AKC website and their decision on registering "Volume Dealers".

[Nancy1999]

Originally Posted by livingdustmops

. . .
I also would like to make a comment in regards to this statement "PUPPY MILLS DO NOT OPERATE WITH AKC MEMBERSHIP OR UNDER THEIR OBSERVATION!" as this is simple not true per the AKC website and their decision on registering "Volume Dealers".

I'm not sure what you mean, could you clarify?

[livingdustmops]

Originally Posted by Nancy1999

I'm not sure what you mean, could you clarify?

Please read my comments in this thread (#29 and #18)

http://www.yorkietalk.com/forums/yor...ss-nation.html

[Nancy1999]

Originally Posted by livingdustmops

Please read my comments in this thread (#29 and #18)

http://www.yorkietalk.com/forums/yor...ss-nation.html

OK, I understand, many people don't know that the AKC still has commercial kennels that could be labeled as puppymills. I hope some day this will not be true. However. the AKC is not a law enforcement agency, and they can not remove a breeder from their lists unless they are breaking state laws on kennel condition requirements. That's why these state laws are so important. Maybe someday, purchasing a pet that is registered with the AKC will really mean something good.

[Doodlebop]

Originally Posted by Nancy1999

I'm not sure if the law can be made to apply something you have done in the past, but I think your reasons for wanting to breed, "I want my family to experience a litter of puppie." are horrible, and I guess that is the type of back yard breeder, that I would really like to see stop breeding. I also don't approve of selling puppies to at such a low price, they are probably going to puppy mill breeders, or brokers. So many labs are rehomed, the buyer doesn't always understand the special needs of a lab, and it's up to the breeder to inform them of this. Finding the right home, is more important than what you charge.

Basically, I think you are saying that the law requires people who breed sell more than 5 dogs a year, to be registered. I think this is great, this doesn't mean that they need to be registered as a "commercial breeder", but just a pet dealer, and isn't that what they are, if they are selling 5 dogs a year? All it's asking is that you keep adequate records and pet records, if you are too busy for this, you shouldn't be breeding.


By the way, I asked which part of the law says that you must only keep three females.

This is exactly the mentality that we are dealing with in the United States!! It is because you think it is disgusting and horrible to breed your family pet, then YOU think it should be ILLEGAL? How are you a Dealer if you have sell five puppies? Come ON...

I also don't agree with back yard breeding, but It shouldn't be ILLEGAL...There are a lot of ignorant poeple reproducing children, that are to ignorant to raise them.... Do we make a law against it!! Tempting I know, but read the Constitution!! It is our RIGHT as AMERICANS...

How Many rights are you going to allow them to take away? Just because this doesn't affect you YET, don't mean something similiar won't affect you later...Let's be a little more open minded

It doesn't say anywhere you can only own three dogs in this BILL. That isn't what she was saying. She was stating that only owning three dogs, she is still affected.

Our society is headed to a sad place, when my pet has insurance, and my neighbors child doesn't.... Let's keep it in perspective..

[wildcard]

I sold 5 puppies last year and would be a pet dealer under this act. With no probable cause to believe a crime was committed police officers would be allowed to view my records? I mean, do you want the police reviewing your personal finances etc with no reason to believe you did anything wrong ir illegal? Last time I checked there was nothing criminal or illegal about breeding a litter of dogs.
Sure on its face 10 litters is a lot. But what happens in 2 yrs when the author of the bill wants to amend it to be 5, then 2, then 1? This incremental approach is being taken next door in Illinois as I write this-- they want any breeder with 3 breedable bitches to have indoor outdoor runs??

I don't want to see animals mistreated whether someone has 1 or 100. Stronger penalties for cruelty and mistreatment are appropriate, not more administration. Let's let our local law enforcement investigate crimes, not dog breeders who have done nothing more than breed a single litter.

There is a reason why we hear of mill busts-- it is because the owners were committing the crimes of neglect and cruelty. Enforcement of what we have works if the time is taken to use the laws on the books.

[Nancy1999]

Originally Posted by Doodlebop

This is exactly the mentality that we are dealing with in the United States!! It is because you think it is disgusting and horrible to breed your family pet, then YOU think it should be ILLEGAL? How are you a Dealer if you have sell five puppies? Come ON...

I also don't agree with back yard breeding, but It shouldn't be ILLEGAL...There are a lot of ignorant poeple reproducing children, that are to ignorant to raise them.... Do we make a law against it!! Tempting I know, but read the Constitution!! It is our RIGHT as AMERICANS...

How Many rights are you going to allow them to take away? Just because this doesn't affect you YET, don't mean something similiar won't affect you later...Let's be a little more open minded

It doesn't say anywhere you can only own three dogs in this BILL. That isn't what she was saying. She was stating that only owning three dogs, she is still affected.

Our society is headed to a sad place, when my pet has insurance, and my neighbors child doesn't.... Let's keep it in perspective..

Unfortunately it won't be illegal, you will just be required to keep records. As Americans, it's our right to speak out against others who are abusing dogs.

If it doesn't say three dogs, she shouldn't imply that it says that, because others read it and see it as unreasonable. It won't affect someone with three dogs. I think you are just using what is known as "scare tactics". I would take you more seriously, if you could say what a better number would be, and why, but you just don't want any law. It too late, there will be a law, lets make it a good one.

[Wylie's Mom]

Want to remind everyone of this rule:

"Though YorkieTalk does not allow political threads, we make an exception for legislation that involves animals, as it pertains to the community. Going forward, if you would like to open a discussion about a bill, please either post the content of the actual bill into the first post or paste the link, via the bill's state, into the post. Please do not post an interpretation of the bill from an organization that already has a formed opinion regarding the bill; this does not foster discussion of the actual merits of the bill. Rather, it leads to discussion about who/what is behind the bill, which isn't productive. Posts that largely focus on criticizing who might be behind the bill, rather than the merits of the bill, will be deleted. We hope this helps generate positive discussions regarding the potential pros and cons of animal welfare legislation. Thank you."

[Nancy1999]

Originally Posted by wildcard

I sold 5 puppies last year and would be a pet dealer under this act. With no probable cause to believe a crime was committed police officers would be allowed to view my records? I mean, do you want the police reviewing your personal finances etc with no reason to believe you did anything wrong ir illegal? Last time I checked there was nothing criminal or illegal about breeding a litter of dogs.
Sure on its face 10 litters is a lot. But what happens in 2 yrs when the author of the bill wants to amend it to be 5, then 2, then 1? This incremental approach is being taken next door in Illinois as I write this-- they want any breeder with 3 breedable bitches to have indoor outdoor runs??

I don't want to see animals mistreated whether someone has 1 or 100. Stronger penalties for cruelty and mistreatment are appropriate, not more administration. Let's let our local law enforcement investigate crimes, not dog breeders who have done nothing more than breed a single litter.

There is a reason why we hear of mill busts-- it is because the owners were committing the crimes of neglect and cruelty. Enforcement of what we have works if the time is taken to use the laws on the books.

OK, I think they would still need probable cause, what makes you think they would not need this? This is something our constitution guarantees, and no state can take this away. Are you sure you are getting you information from valid sources?

[livingdustmops]

Originally Posted by Doodlebop

This is exactly the mentality that we are dealing with in the United States!! It is because you think it is disgusting and horrible to breed your family pet, then YOU think it should be ILLEGAL? How are you a Dealer if you have sell five puppies? Come ON...

I also don't agree with back yard breeding, but It shouldn't be ILLEGAL...There are a lot of ignorant poeple reproducing children, that are to ignorant to raise them.... Do we make a law against it!! Tempting I know, but read the Constitution!! It is our RIGHT as AMERICANS...

How Many rights are you going to allow them to take away? Just because this doesn't affect you YET, don't mean something similiar won't affect you later...Let's be a little more open minded

It doesn't say anywhere you can only own three dogs in this BILL. That isn't what she was saying. She was stating that only owning three dogs, she is still affected.

Our society is headed to a sad place, when my pet has insurance, and my neighbors child doesn't.... Let's keep it in perspective..

Wow - your rights! What about my rights not to have to pay for the surplus animals in shelters to be euthanized or taken care of. What about my rights not to have to pay organizations to go after these inhuman breeder. What about the rights of people who bought dogs that they had to pay a small fortune to save the animal because the breeder didn't care. Having been in rescue I paid a small forture in saving Yorkies and making them healthy to place into a forever home. And please why do I have to pay the price for "Hobby" breeders that are just breeding because they love the show world. No one pays for my hobbies. I will ask again, how many of these people are even paying taxes on this business...people selling dog clothes have to, why shouldn't the breeders.

And finally what about the rights of these poor animals that have to suffer in horrible conditions and don't have a voice!

[yorkiekist]

Originally Posted by Doodlebop

Chapter 7. Pet Dealers
Sec. 1. A pet dealer must maintain a log containing the:
(1) name;
(2) address;
(3) city; and
(4) state;
of the breeder and broker, if applicable, that provided each puppy sold by the pet dealer. The pet dealer must retain the log for at least two (2) years.
Sec. 2. A pet dealer must maintain veterinary records of every animal sold by the pet dealer. The pet dealer must retain the veterinary records of every animal sold or offered for sale by the
pet dealer for at least two (2) years.
Sec. 3. A pet dealer shall make the breeder log described in section 1 of this chapter available to law enforcement officials.
Sec. 4. A pet dealer shall make the veterinary records described in section 2 of this chapter available to purchasers or prospective purchasers

If you sell 5 puppies a year you are considered a "Pet Dealer"

Scenario: I have a family labrador, I want my family to experience a litter of puppies. I breeder her, sell her puppies for 100 dollars each. Since I do not have AKC papers, I did not keep any information. I am now a criminal. I have unknowingly broken the law. I can face Charges!!

How is this reasonable?

Since this Bill was snuck in under the table, there was not a lot of discussion from all points of views.

I read you think the Lemon Law is a good idea...
If ALL consumers were honest, there would not be a problem with the lemon law. Consumers can be liars too!! How is the breeder going to protect themselves against lies if the law is on their side?

Scenario:

I sell a dog to a young couple with an 8 year and a 5 year old. The puppy is dropped on its head, and immediately goes into seizures. The mother rushes the puppy to the vet, It is hooked up to IV's, tests are started, then the puppy dies. The consumer does not reveal the fact the puppy was dropped, relays to the vet that the puppy was recently purchased, and really hasn't been doing well, and now this, but refuses to do an autopsy. The vet writes diagnosis congenital defect... Not Only would I be forced to give them their money back, I would be FORCED to offer them another puppy, and pay their vet bills up to the purchase price of the puppy. So if I sold the puppy for 1000 dollars, I would be out 2000 dollars, and I may have to send another puppy to possibly endure the same demise!!

How is this reasonable?

How many times do you think this scenario or ones like it has to happen before even the best of breeders, say IT is NOT worth it??

Limited to 30 dogs?? I thought the bill was about cruel and inhumane treatment of animals? Shouldn't the conditions be examined, the number of help, and the size Buildings, all be taken into consideration before a number is given. If I go into a firehouse, there is a maximum capacity posted on the wall. That number was pulled out of thin air, limiting an amount, on what someone thought sounded like enough!!

I personally think that it is more than enough, but if someone running a awesome dog operation, where there are tons of help, school kids coming in and loving the dogs, the facilities clean , What is the problem. I am tired of small and large activists groups telling us what is politically correct, and how to think!!

Right on!!! The laws shouldnt be about the numbers of dogs/litters, it should be on the humane treatment of dogs only.

[yorkiekist]

Originally Posted by Doodlebop

This is exactly the mentality that we are dealing with in the United States!! It is because you think it is disgusting and horrible to breed your family pet, then YOU think it should be ILLEGAL? How are you a Dealer if you have sell five puppies? Come ON...

I also don't agree with back yard breeding, but It shouldn't be ILLEGAL...There are a lot of ignorant poeple reproducing children, that are to ignorant to raise them.... Do we make a law against it!! Tempting I know, but read the Constitution!! It is our RIGHT as AMERICANS...

How Many rights are you going to allow them to take away? Just because this doesn't affect you YET, don't mean something similiar won't affect you later...Let's be a little more open minded

It doesn't say anywhere you can only own three dogs in this BILL. That isn't what she was saying. She was stating that only owning three dogs, she is still affected.

Our society is headed to a sad place, when my pet has insurance, and my neighbors child doesn't.... Let's keep it in perspective..