New dog ordinance
 

El Paso has a new dog ordinance. All breeders and nonbreeders having puppies have to purchase a permit $75 per litter for nonbreeders and $100 per litter for breeders.

Also, no puppies are to be sold or given away before 8 weeks. Any puppies given away before 8 weeks have to be turned over to the humane society. This is fantastic cuz I've seen ads for pups 5 weeks and ready to go..makes me sick.

Puppies are no longer allowed to be sold for profit under 1 year of age.

Although I see this overall as a great thing to help put a stop to careless breeding practices, I also see this with mixed feelings. I dont think its going to stop puppy mills in our area. They'll just sell their pups outside city limits. Also, many puppies are brought over from mexico and sold in our city.

The reasons for the permits is to reduce the number of animals brought to the animal shelter. Half of our city doesnt have to comply because they are in another state. They arent even required to mircochip and many of those dogs are dumped at the shelter. Is this really gonna greatly reduce the numbers at animal shelters??

I dont see how rules only effecting half the city is gonna do much good. Microchipping is a law here thats been in effect for 5 years. Since half of the city doesnt have to microchip, it has not helped bring down numbers at the shelter.

It seems that El Paso has some real bad roadside stuff going on so maybe drastic measures needed to be taken there. It's sad.

Where to begin… Most legislators don’t know the first thing about effective and appropriate animal legislation. They pass these laws to show their constituents that they are doing “something.” They would rather pass bad laws than no laws at all. More concerning is that they are influenced by one of the strongest, most effective and well-funded lobbying groups in America. The political agenda of the HSUS is clear by their actions and accomplishments. They are quickly eroding the rights of pet owners and anyone who does not share their “animal rights” views through lobbying legislators to pass laws which restrict pet ownership and pet availability. The largely unsuspecting public thinks they are donating directly to shelters and “poor animals”. The Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) is not an animal charity in the usual sense. If you look at their 2009 tax return, you find that they collected $101.6 million in revenue. They spent $6.7 million in services and grants and spent $74.1 million on “other expenses”. The other expenses are funds spent lobbying. In fact, they are under investigation by the IRS for misrepresenting themselves. Any other charity that spent a mere 7% of its revenue on services would be considered a miserable failure. These laws are not stopping any unethical people – the unethical breeders and abusers already ignore the law or move out of the jurisdiction. Studies have shown that education of the public changes behavior - not more restrictive laws. As responsible citizens and pet owners, it is incumbent upon each of us to educate ourselves on the issues affecting us and acting upon them. Contact your legislators and let them know how you feel on issues of importance to you. The AKC has a page with links to pending legislation in each state. Another helpful site is humanewatch dot org.
"My reading of history convinces me that most bad government results from too much government. Thomas Jefferson
Sorry, I will get down from my soapbox now…

It said...no pups are allowed to be sold for profit under a year of age...
Does it mean a breeder must only charge for actual expenses to produce the litter???

Yes...excluding food. The original proposal tried to put a complete ban on ALL sales of puppies PERIOD.

Well there you go. The city is well on it's way to doing what Animal Rights Activists want. No pet ownership. It has nothing to do with the pets ending up in shelters, or promoting reputable breeding practices.

Let me add that it amazes me beyond belief that a law such as this has been passed in a city right across the Mexican boarder and Juarez. I would think they would be doing more to stop the drug trafficing and murders associated with drugs.

Why go after drugs and crime when you can prosecute dangerous dog owners instead. :rolleyes:
In all seriousness, I agree with the assessment that this is all for show. How are they going to enforce it? Are they going to go from house to house to see if you have a litter that needs registering? Are the puppy police going to ask to see your records to see how much you've spent on that litter to know if you are making a profit? It's a knee jerk response.

More government is never the answer in my opinion. You cannot legislate people into being "good" to their own children much less their pets.

I had the same thoughts about Mexico.

Too bad, it always like some irresponsible people ruin it for all.

YES.......My sister told me some years back they went house to house to see if dogs were registered and up-to-date on vaccinations. They left a nasty gram on her door and she had to take in proof. Her neighbors told her what they saw that day...they literally went house-to-house.

Maybe there needs to be a breeding fee to have children. I bet unwanted/uncared for children cost the public a whole lot more than abandoned pets do. Seems to me that this type of law, like most regulatory laws just make it harder for the responsible, honest people and doesn't do much to help with the real problem.

How are they going to find out who has puppies? Require vets to report any newborn animals that they treat (like they do with rabies vaccinations in my area)? I bet that just causes fewer pets to get the veterinary care they need.

We're at the point that legislators should have to repeal two old laws before they can enact one new one.

Then the town has too much money. Holy cow, I could think of much better things to be spending tax money on!

Last summer the city where I live.....they did do a house to house to insure all dogs were licensed. All well and good and I understand, why? However, the Animal Control Officer informed my husband, that this was being done because at a time where local city, county and state governments are operating in the red.....it was their biggest revenue maker. They usually don't do this unless the coffers are empty.

omg!!!!