Breeders I want your professional opinion on this Proposition.

[blondschilli]

I say Vote Yes on Prop B. To many overcrowded cruelly run Kennels here in Mo. We need to try to get hold of this situation and this is a first step in trying to help those poor pups and dogs. YES!!

[Doodlebop]

This bill has many issues.

The first issue is in the very beginning when the word "Custody" is used. We do not take guardianship or Custody over our animals. Wording like this will lead to our animals filing lawsuits against us with organizations trying to prove a point. In America, We OWN our animals.

That being said, the people writing this bill are not breeders. If I am raising Siberian Huskies and I plan to work then in the Artic temperatures they have to be acclimated to cold temperatures or they will die. There has to exceptions to this rule.

Skipping Breedings. If I breed a female starting after a championship, 2-3 years old, and retire at 5 years old, like most good breeders do, then that should be up to me as a breeder, not someone who just thinks it sounds good.

Exercise. This is not specified very well. Must the dog be removed from the kennel and walked? How can this possibly be monitored? This is unenforceable..

No stacking cages. I have an RV with stacked cages for dog shows. Now this illegal? Or for only Kennels. I have 3 tier cages for my puppies when we are doing dewormings, Anyone who has dewormed a puppy knows that it is better for the puppy to go through grates, so they don't eat it.

For a toy breed dog, you would be required to have 4x4 indoor boxes and 8x8 outdoor runs? That is not a good idea for small breed dogs. To much room on the indoor run will caused soiling indoors, and not promote them to go outdoors. So if you have 10 toy dogs, if not in your house you would have to have a 40 foot outdoor building and for those of you with them in the house that is 4x4 cages per dog. Most people do not crate their dogs in this size of cages. Where do they get these numbers?

If you are a small hobby breeder this will hurt you the most, then the people left are the people making big bucks on their dogs, the retailers, puppymillers, and pet shops, they can afford to rennovate.

How is this going to be paid for? More Taxes. As a economy are you all ready for more taxes. They have a system in place, it is overloaded and failing, so you want to pay for another system.

If the HSUS keeps this up, we will be like New England , unable to find a breeder in their state. They don't want anyone to be able to breed dogs, and would like for no one to own them.

Don't be fooled, Vote NO

[megansmomma]

Originally Posted by 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.

Great post! I wish that I knew more about the bill to discuss it further but unfortunately I do not. From what I have read, the things that I have seen regarding puppy mills and the treatment or better lack there of should say to everyone that the current laws are not working. For Missouri to be attracting notorious millers from across the country to open up shop~that alone should be throwing up huge read flags.

Below are quoted from this link

Approximately 40% of all pet store puppies nationwide are bred in Missouri, where almost 200,000 breeding dogs produce up to a million puppies a year. Consumers across the country have reported purchasing Missouri puppy mill puppies with significant health and/or genetic conditions, causing high veterinary bills and emotional devastation for the families involved.

Puppy mills are a $1,000,000,.000 a year business. Of course the millers are going to be against a bill that is going to make them put even a small portion of their profits back into their "livestock".

I am proud that IL has legislation regarding Pet Store and mills. We are an agricultural based state and there has been no impact on our cows, horse, sheep, chickens that I have seen resulting from puppy mill legislation.

In the last three years, fifteen states - including major puppy mill states such as Iowa, Oklahoma, and Pennsylvania-- have passed laws to crack down on puppy mills by requiring basic care standards at mass-breeding facilities and/or limiting the number of breeding dogs that can be kept at a single facility. Most states have handled these policy reforms through their state legislatures, but Missouri lawmakers are beholden to the special interest puppy mill lobby and have failed to respond to public opinion and citizen demands for better care for companion animals. Prop B is similar to the laws that have been passed in other states, and gives Missouri citizens the opportunity to do what the legislature has not.

*The Truth about Prop B - Alliance for Truth

Let's talk about the special interest puppy mill lobby. With a billion dollar a year business why wouldn't they have lobbyists to try to say voters opinion in their favor?

To me is seems pretty ridiculous to use the argument that cattle will be regulated by future bills. You do not stuff a cow into a crate or is that something that is done in cow mills Dogs are domesticated animals and should be treated as such. There is no reason other than profit for someone to own 50 or more breeding bitches other than to make a profit. How do you take care of that many dogs without neglect? Puppy mills are know for selling sick and poorly bred dogs. There needs to be laws in place that address the current problems.

There is not enough space in rescues for all of the dogs being pumped out of the mills in this county. There are millions of dogs PTS every year in shelters all across this country. Millers see nothing wrong with bumping used of bitches at the shelters. The lucky ones find rescues. The unlucky are euthanized for lack of room. The least lucky disposed of.

After being bred again and again, sometimes until their uteruses literally “prolapse” or protrude from their bodies, used up breeding dogs are often quickly discarded or killed when they can no longer turn a profit for their owners. Puppy mill owners often kill these dogs themselves to save on veterinary bills. Currently there is no specific law in Missouri that prevents puppy mill operators from destroying “used up” dogs themselves. Prop B would prevent the euthanasia of unwanted dogs by anyone other than a licensed veterinarian.

How about Missouri's Dirty Dozen?


Puppy mills that sell directly to the public are not required to be licensed. This loop hole has brought about the internet selling of puppies to unsuspecting buyers.

USDA report on how puppymills are not covered

[blondschilli]

Originally Posted by megansmomma

Great post! I wish that I knew more about the bill to discuss it further but unfortunately I do not. From what I have read, the things that I have seen regarding puppy mills and the treatment or better lack there of should say to everyone that the current laws are not working. For Missouri to be attracting notorious millers from across the country to open up shop~that alone should be throwing up huge read flags.

Below are quoted from this link


Puppy mills are a $1,000,000,.000 a year business. Of course the millers are going to be against a bill that is going to make them put even a small portion of their profits back into their "livestock".

I am proud that IL has legislation regarding Pet Store and mills. We are an agricultural based state and there has been no impact on our cows, horse, sheep, chickens that I have seen resulting from puppy mill legislation.



*The Truth about Prop B - Alliance for Truth

Let's talk about the special interest puppy mill lobby. With a billion dollar a year business why wouldn't they have lobbyists to try to say voters opinion in their favor?

To me is seems pretty ridiculous to use the argument that cattle will be regulated by future bills. You do not stuff a cow into a crate or is that something that is done in cow mills Dogs are domesticated animals and should be treated as such. There is no reason other than profit for someone to own 50 or more breeding bitches other than to make a profit. How do you take care of that many dogs without neglect? Puppy mills are know for selling sick and poorly bred dogs. There needs to be laws in place that address the current problems.

There is not enough space in rescues for all of the dogs being pumped out of the mills in this county. There are millions of dogs PTS every year in shelters all across this country. Millers see nothing wrong with bumping used of bitches at the shelters. The lucky ones find rescues. The unlucky are euthanized for lack of room. The least lucky disposed of.



How about Missouri's Dirty Dozen?


Puppy mills that sell directly to the public are not required to be licensed. This loop hole has brought about the internet selling of puppies to unsuspecting buyers.

USDA report on how puppymills are not covered

YES< YES YES Well said, I will keep on tell my customers and anyone I come in contact with to vote yes, even on facebook.:thum bup:

[Teresamag]

It's not just the "special interest groups" that are against this bill. AKC and other breeding groups with great reputations are against this bill - including the Columbia Missouri Kennel Club which is a conformation and obedience kennel club in our area. Please see their website for their objections. index
Also, if anyone wants to see the direct bill and my objections to each part can see it here Prop-B--more
Teresa
Magnum Yorkies

[babsie1952]

I respect that you guys are reputable breeders but some of the facts you guys bring in here convalude the issue.

Prop B is not about HSUS, the other associations for or against this.

It is meant for the animals that are not being monitored because USDA cannot and does not regulate and correct problems, for those of you that state laws are already in place.

I beg you to go to the USDA site and see the repeated violations of licensed breeders that continue and keep on being non compliant.

Breeding is a business that is regulated and the federal regulatory association is USDA, and it is not working so the state is stepping in because Missouri has the highest instance of puppy mill abuse.

I respect your right to make and income and this bill is about the animals, it is about the animals and NOTHING else.

It is not meant to pick on breeders, or the conspirancy theory of the HSUS, ASPCA.

Take a few hours on YOU TUBE or the Facebook Account Let Me Go and Love Me-Opposition on Commercial Breeding.

It you are fair and balanced, and who you say you are, it is time to protect the animals and I am sure you can put up with the regulations to see them monitored.

Don't compare apple and oranges. When you see there are only about 20 USDA inspectors US wide to regulate, you can understand how this can happen. These legislatures have passed in other states and breeders did not drop dead the day they were passed.

Look at all the violators on the USDA website, the inspection dates and compliance rates.

[babsie1952]

I listen to intelligent people take the words of this bill out of context and then say something like: we will be taxed to death, who will rehome all the dogs that are over 50, HSUS is the anti christ.

The main points are:

-This is to take care of dogs that are not being taken care of by the current system and the State has the responsibility to do so.
-It is not to take your income away or a conspiracy theory and no matter who is for or not for, if one, just one Yorkie, Cairn or other dog that has been treated poorly is treated better, it is WORTH it
-As others have said, these laws have been passed in other states and NO ONE fell over dead but many poor breeders who couldn't continue with non compliant reports, got out of the business.
-Business regulations change in all businesses, and this is the cost of doing business because others in the industry did not comply and were compelled by greed.

Read the other states that have the legislature and the dates they were enacted and the progress on the ASPCA website.

And, oh please, the ASPCA and HSUS are not special interest groups, they save dogs and animals and that is all I care about and I can go read their financial statements and all the stuff said about them are not true.

Read USDA reports and list of violaters and repeated violators
Read about where the laws are working in other states and none of what you guys are concerned about have happened.

I think that good business to look at a business model working that you will be asked to vote on, this is wise business, not over reacting

[megansmomma]

Originally Posted by babsie1952

I respect that you guys are reputable breeders but some of the facts you guys bring in here convalude the issue.

Prop B is not about HSUS, the other associations for or against this.

It is meant for the animals that are not being monitored because USDA cannot and does not regulate and correct problems, for those of you that state laws are already in place.

I beg you to go to the USDA site and see the repeated violations of licensed breeders that continue and keep on being non compliant.

Breeding is a business that is regulated and the federal regulatory association is USDA, and it is not working so the state is stepping in because Missouri has the highest instance of puppy mill abuse.

I respect your right to make and income and this bill is about the animals, it is about the animals and NOTHING else.

It is not meant to pick on breeders, or the conspirancy theory of the HSUS, ASPCA.

Take a few hours on YOU TUBE or the Facebook Account Let Me Go and Love Me-Opposition on Commercial Breeding.

It you are fair and balanced, and who you say you are, it is time to protect the animals and I am sure you can put up with the regulations to see them monitored.

Don't compare apple and oranges. When you see there are only about 20 USDA inspectors US wide to regulate, you can understand how this can happen. These legislatures have passed in other states and breeders did not drop dead the day they were passed.

Look at all the violators on the USDA website, the inspection dates and compliance rates.

For every human born, 7 puppies and kittens are born.

One female cat and her offspring can produce 420,000 cats in 7 years.

One female dog and her offspring can produce 67,000 puppies in 6 years.

More than 12 MILLION dogs and cats are euthanized in shelters each year. Millions more are abandoned in rural and urban areas.

As many as 25% of dogs entering shelters each year are purebreds.

Approximately 61% of all dogs entering shelters are killed.

Approximately 75% of all cats entering shelters are killed.

It costs approximately $100 to capture, house, feed, and eventually kill each stray animal -- a cost which you, the taxpayer, eventually pay.

[Woogie Man]

Estimated number of cats and dogs entering shelters each year:

6-8 million (HSUS estimate)
Estimated number of cats and dogs euthanized by shelters each year:

3-4 million (HSUS estimate)
Estimated number of cats and dogs adopted from shelters each year:

3-4 million (HSUS estimate)
Estimated number of cats and dogs reclaimed by owners from shelters each year:

30 percent of dogs and 2-5 percent of cats entering shelters (HSUS estimate)
Estimated number of animal shelters in the United States:

3,500 (HSUS estimate)
Estimated percent of dogs in shelters who are purebred:

25 percent (HSUS estimate)

From this link..... HSUS Pet Overpopulation Estimates : The Humane Society of the United States

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"Rowan and Patronek report that about 52 million dogs live in 35 million US households. About 6.2 million dogs die each year, 3.8 million in homes, veterinary hospitals and under the wheels of a vehicle, and an additional 2.4 million in shelters. Each year, owners acquire about 7.3 million dogs, including 5.8 million puppies from pet stores and breeders, one million dogs from animal shelters, and 500,000 as adult strays or previously owned pets."

from this link... NAIA: Are there too many dogs and cats?

[RachelandSadie]

Wayne Pacelle, President of HSUS says,
"I don't want to see another dog or cat born."
"We have no problem with the extinction of domestic animals."

Oh really Mr. Pacelle? So then you are OKAY with thousands and millions of euthanized pets because in your opinion there should be NO domestic animal left? Hmmm... I cannot and will not support a group such as this no matter if Prop. B was worded exactly perfect and would really attack mills and pet stores in MO. i hate this group who spends all their money on themselves and not on the rescues and the spay/neuter clinics who actually do work hard to save puppies. this group is sick and against even pet ownership and wants to completely abolish pets entirely. i will not support them. Yes something does need to be done. this bill has raised a lot of great ideas in order to help shut down puppy mills, but it needs revised, redone, and to have a lot more thought and research into it before any Missourian is going to vote for it. and no one in my family or farming community will support any group that acts like HSUS or PETA they just won't. if ASPCA or AKC put forth a bill like this with much better writing and that made more sense and did something i'd be banging down doors trying to get voters.

What does need to be done:

Funding: we need the money to put MO dept. of agriculture out there enforcing the current laws rather than making new laws that we still don't have the man power to carry out.

Attacking Puppy Mills Specficially: We need a bill that forces all people with ANY number of dogs used in breeding to come under the current law or be fined or jailed. How can you catch a miller if they aren't opperating under any laws? You can't. we need the man power out there regulating ALL operations and not just regulating the law abiding ones.

Attacking Pet stores: you want to shut out puppy mills shut out their main source of sales. the pet store.

Attack the number of dogs: here is where i personally agree with Prop. B. no one shuold have more than 50 dogs breeding at a time that's crazy. while i agree dogs are property, that is cruel to have that many animals at once for the purpose of breeding them for money (dogs and cats only) that should change

Sufficient space and food and water. the current laws are set to already establish heathy food and clean water. sufficient space could be improved upon, but a Yorkie doesn't need 12 square feet of space to live all the time when it's in a transitional period between birth and going to a forever home. shelters don't even have that much space for their dogs...it's nuts. yes we all wish all bred dogs lived in people's warm and cozy homes full of giant living areas, but they don't. that's not realistic, so at least asking them not to use stacked crates and live in filth and have a little more room isn't too much to ask.

we all agree on one thing something has to be done! and fast! but personally i do not believe this bill is written well enough or well educated enough to work and i don't agree with the radical agenda of HSUS.

[blondschilli]

I do agree with alot of issues your stating, They do need more man power to really enforce this ballot, If they hired about 50 more people we could finally crack down on these nasty cruel kennels and their owners , like u said fined and thrown in jail. I still Have to vote YES I have seen these nasty kennels and would do what ever it takes to try to help put an end to the abuse.

[Mardelin]

Originally Posted by RachelandSadie

Wayne Pacelle, President of HSUS says,
"I don't want to see another dog or cat born."
"We have no problem with the extinction of domestic animals."

Oh really Mr. Pacelle? So then you are OKAY with thousands and millions of euthanized pets because in your opinion there should be NO domestic animal left? Hmmm... I cannot and will not support a group such as this no matter if Prop. B was worded exactly perfect and would really attack mills and pet stores in MO. i hate this group who spends all their money on themselves and not on the rescues and the spay/neuter clinics who actually do work hard to save puppies. this group is sick and against even pet ownership and wants to completely abolish pets entirely. i will not support them. Yes something does need to be done. this bill has raised a lot of great ideas in order to help shut down puppy mills, but it needs revised, redone, and to have a lot more thought and research into it before any Missourian is going to vote for it. and no one in my family or farming community will support any group that acts like HSUS or PETA they just won't. if ASPCA or AKC put forth a bill like this with much better writing and that made more sense and did something i'd be banging down doors trying to get voters.

What does need to be done:

Funding: we need the money to put MO dept. of agriculture out there enforcing the current laws rather than making new laws that we still don't have the man power to carry out.

Attacking Puppy Mills Specficially: We need a bill that forces all people with ANY number of dogs used in breeding to come under the current law or be fined or jailed. How can you catch a miller if they aren't opperating under any laws? You can't. we need the man power out there regulating ALL operations and not just regulating the law abiding ones.

Attacking Pet stores: you want to shut out puppy mills shut out their main source of sales. the pet store.

Attack the number of dogs: here is where i personally agree with Prop. B. no one shuold have more than 50 dogs breeding at a time that's crazy. while i agree dogs are property, that is cruel to have that many animals at once for the purpose of breeding them for money (dogs and cats only) that should change

Sufficient space and food and water. the current laws are set to already establish heathy food and clean water. sufficient space could be improved upon, but a Yorkie doesn't need 12 square feet of space to live all the time when it's in a transitional period between birth and going to a forever home. shelters don't even have that much space for their dogs...it's nuts. yes we all wish all bred dogs lived in people's warm and cozy homes full of giant living areas, but they don't. that's not realistic, so at least asking them not to use stacked crates and live in filth and have a little more room isn't too much to ask.

we all agree on one thing something has to be done! and fast! but personally i do not believe this bill is written well enough or well educated enough to work and i don't agree with the radical agenda of HSUS.

My sentiments exactly and I couldn't agree with you more.

The “Humane Society” That Isn’t


Our analysis last year of the Humane Society of the United States’ 2008 tax return drew a lot of eyeballs, because HSUS’s animal-rights priorities became clearer than ever before. Just one-half of one percent of HSUS’s 2008 budget consisted of grants to pet shelters. Meanwhile, the group spent lavishly on animal rights campaigns, lobbying, and litigation to push a PETA-style agenda on Americans.
This week we obtained a copy of HSUS’s 2009 IRS filing, and once again, it doesn't tell a pretty story. (You can view the whole return here.)
As we're telling readers of HumaneWatch.org, HSUS collected $97 million in donations last year and spent $22 million on fundraising. In other words, 23 cents of every dollar HSUS collected went right back out the door to raise more money. (We don't call 'em factory fundraisers for nothing.)
The bottom line for 2009 is the same as usual: HSUS sucked in millions from unsuspecting Americans who believed it was running pet shelters (it wasn’t), or that it would give a substantial portion of that money to pet shelters (it didn’t). Instead, HSUS funneled millions to political front groups and affiliated organizations that it controls.
Last year, HSUS earmarked between 1 and 1.5 percent (we're still crunching the numbers) for grants to hands-on pet shelters. That's a step up from the 0.45 percent HSUS shared with cash-strapped pet shelters in 2008, but it's still a pathetic total.
HSUS’s biggest expenses in 2009 were for direct-mail and online marketing costs, not animal care. Wayne Pacelle, HSUS’s tel-evangelical vegan activist CEO, now has an annual compensation package worth over $269,000. And HSUS contributed another $2.59 million to its bloated executive pension plan in 2009.

[yorkiegirl2]

Here is an interesting read about claims against HSUS.
About HSUS HumaneWatch Info

There are a number of misconceptions about the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS), misconceptions that HumaneWatch and CCF are all too happy to prey upon. Let's begin by clearing up the most deceptive claims made by HumaneWatch, and learn a little about the HSUS in the process.


"HSUS doesn't care about animals. The HSUS doesn't support animal shelters, and only a fraction of its revenue is devoted to local shelters."

"HSUS ads deceive consumers into thinking that their funds are going directly to local shelters."

"The Humane Society wants to force us all to be vegetarians — or vegans."

"The HSUS wants to put all breeders out of business. They won't be happy until all pets have been confiscated."

"The HSUS has an extremist animal rights agenda. They want all use of animals to cease, even guide dogs."

"The HSUS pays its directors exorbitant salaries and outrageous pensions."

"Local shelters hate the HSUS."

Also interesting is Richard Berman

Richard Berman is the longtime president of the Washington, D.C.-based lobbying and consulting firm, Berman & Company, Inc. ("BCI") which specializes in strategic research and communications. Throughout the years Berman has been a stalwart supporter of business and industry over consumer, safety and environmental groups. Berman has fought unions, Mothers Against Drunk Driving, PETA and other watchdog groups in their efforts to raise awareness about obesity, the dangers of smoking, mad cow disease, drunk driving, the minimum wage and other causes. He has been described in the press as a "notorious D.C. lobbyist."

Who is Richard Berman?
Facts on Berman | Berman Exposed

Berman founded and runs four tax-exempt front groups and a number of linked projects, focusing on food, tobacco, alcoholic beverages and labor. He is well-paid by the represented industries to serve as the executive director of all four organizations. Berman then uses his own lobbying and public relations firm to do work for the organizations, thereby channeling between 49% and 79% of all donations made to the groups into his own pocket.

These organizations include:

The Center for Consumer Freedom ("CCF", formerly Guest Choice Network, "GCN"), which attacks anyone who criticizes smoking, fast food or alcohol;
The Employment Policies Institute ("EPI") which opposes increasing the minimum wage and promotes the specious concept that an increased minimum wage would drive the poor and uneducated out of the job market;
The American Beverage Institute ("ABI") which fights laws designed to curb drunk driving;
The Center for Union Facts ("CUF") which promotes disparaging information about unions;
Bowling Proprietors Association of America, which lists the same word-for-word issues as the ABI on their lobbying disclosure forms; and
First Jobs Institute, which promotes personal finance advice to young people from a pro-business perspective.
Berman was also executive vice president of public affairs for the Pillsbury Restaurant Group and was once director of labor law for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

Center for Consumer Freedom or Deception? You Decide.
Richard Berman is an influence peddler. He has worked out a scheme to funnel charitable donations from wealthy corporations into his own pocket. In exchange, he provides a flurry of disinformation, flawed studies, op-ed pieces, letters to the editor, and trade-industry articles, as well as access to his high-level government contacts, who are servants of the industries he represents.

Is HumaneWatch Trading Guile for Bile? HumaneWatch Info
David Martosko's recent string of ugly missteps and his dwindling influence within CCF's HumaneWatch. Two short weeks later, David Martosko has announced on the HumaneWatch blog that his name will no longer be "plastered on everything", and that he may "back away for a while".

[yorkiegirl2]

Humane Society of Missouri Rescued More Than 90 Yorkies
from Substandard Puppy Mill
Video from 2009
Part 1

YouTube - Humane Society of Missouri Rescued More...

Part 2

YouTube - Rescued Yorkies from Substandard Puppy...

More on this story

YouTube - KSPR Humane Society Yorkshire Terriers...

Missouri puppy mill auction scandal
How Missouri Dept of Agriculture fails to enforce the laws.

YouTube - Missouri puppy mill auction scandal

Puppy Mill Insider Speaks Out
This one is not in Missouri but I’m sure it happen here too.

YouTube - Puppy Mill Insider Speaks Out

[megansmomma]

Originally Posted by RachelandSadie

Wayne Pacelle, President of HSUS says,
"I don't want to see another dog or cat born."
"We have no problem with the extinction of domestic animals."

Oh really Mr. Pacelle? So then you are OKAY with thousands and millions of euthanized pets because in your opinion there should be NO domestic animal left? Hmmm... I cannot and will not support a group such as this no matter if Prop. B was worded exactly perfect and would really attack mills and pet stores in MO. i hate this group who spends all their money on themselves and not on the rescues and the spay/neuter clinics who actually do work hard to save puppies. this group is sick and against even pet ownership and wants to completely abolish pets entirely. i will not support them. Yes something does need to be done. this bill has raised a lot of great ideas in order to help shut down puppy mills, but it needs revised, redone, and to have a lot more thought and research into it before any Missourian is going to vote for it. and no one in my family or farming community will support any group that acts like HSUS or PETA they just won't. if ASPCA or AKC put forth a bill like this with much better writing and that made more sense and did something i'd be banging down doors trying to get voters.

What does need to be done:

Funding: we need the money to put MO dept. of agriculture out there enforcing the current laws rather than making new laws that we still don't have the man power to carry out.

Attacking Puppy Mills Specficially: We need a bill that forces all people with ANY number of dogs used in breeding to come under the current law or be fined or jailed. How can you catch a miller if they aren't opperating under any laws? You can't. we need the man power out there regulating ALL operations and not just regulating the law abiding ones.

Attacking Pet stores: you want to shut out puppy mills shut out their main source of sales. the pet store.

Attack the number of dogs: here is where i personally agree with Prop. B. no one shuold have more than 50 dogs breeding at a time that's crazy. while i agree dogs are property, that is cruel to have that many animals at once for the purpose of breeding them for money (dogs and cats only) that should change

Sufficient space and food and water. the current laws are set to already establish heathy food and clean water. sufficient space could be improved upon, but a Yorkie doesn't need 12 square feet of space to live all the time when it's in a transitional period between birth and going to a forever home. shelters don't even have that much space for their dogs...it's nuts. yes we all wish all bred dogs lived in people's warm and cozy homes full of giant living areas, but they don't. that's not realistic, so at least asking them not to use stacked crates and live in filth and have a little more room isn't too much to ask.

we all agree on one thing something has to be done! and fast! but personally i do not believe this bill is written well enough or well educated enough to work and i don't agree with the radical agenda of HSUS.

I would like to see a specif post or link directing me to Wayne Pacelle making this statement. Other than the links to the radical group that is affiliated with the puppymills of this country I can not find this statement anywhere.

I cannot for the life of me understand why you would support milling in your state. You have 2 dogs that are both from poor breeding that have had numerous health issues.

I come to this forum every day and see the sick dogs purchased from Pet Store that come from the mills. Most come from~guess where~ Missouri. Why are there so many mills in your state? Because there is no regulations or the current regulations are not strong enough to be enforceable to shut them down.

Rachel~I think you need to become more informed and take note of what is being said all around you in this forum regarding the disgraceful treatment and the number of puppy mills in YOUR STATE. It isn't know as the Puppy Mill Capital for nothing. Missouri=Misery when is comes to Puppy Mills.

Do you know understand these killers shoot, beat to death, perform c-sections without vets or anesthesia on their dogs. They are crowded into cages and attack and kill each other. They live in filthy and with own waste their entire lives only to die when they are no longer useful to these horrible millers.

This is going on all around you. There are more mills in Missouri than any other state in the USA. Dogs are not meant to be agriculture. You have been sucked in by misrepresentation by lobbyists who's job is to suck you in to their way of thinking. They get big bucks as mentioned above to sway the uniformed with misinformation to stoke their agendas. The AKC makes millions from the mills why would the support this legislation?

I firmly stand behind the HSUS and what they are trying to accomplish. If the USDA can't apply the current regulations to the epidemic that is going on them something more needs to be done.