Puppy Mill Protester Tackled by Mall Cops

[yorkiekist]

Originally Posted by Nancy1999

I just ask you to consider the idea that some of the information you get regarding certain laws and legislation comes from huge lobbies that are backed by commercial breeders, and "sporting dog" associations backed by dog fighting enthusiasts. I think they are trying to scare the heck out of the small breeder, and know if they get the backing of all the small breeders they can fight many laws that would really only affect them. I wish the AKC could be trusted to look out for the small breeder, but I'm not sure this is the case, since they still have so many commercial breeders registered with them.

AKC always makes me aware of these bills and have lists and all e-mail addys of who to write to. I dont think that there are too many commercial breeders registering with AKC anymore because of the DNA and inspections. I dont know if the dogs /pitbulls used in fighting are registered with AKC or not. The breed clubs make us well aware also. I believe these bills will effect the small breeder as well as the commercial ones. Some bills go so far as to tell you exactly how big your kennel must be, all veterinary procedures and medications must be administered by a vet, cant ship across certain state lines, must have mandatory worming and on and on. I do alot of "veterinary" procedures myself, just to cut costs and un-needed stress on the dogs. Everytime I go to the vet, I increase the chance of bringing home parvo. I do my own tails and dews, give my own shots(except rabies), buy alot of medications/supplies/supplements from Revival, and worm my own dogs only if needed. If some of these micro-manage type bills pass, I will have to go to the vet for every flippin thing.
Other bills want a 20 dog limit of un-altered dogs over 16 weeks of age. How stupid is that? We here on YT usually only think of a small litter of 3. What about Labrador breeders whos average litter is 8? If they have 3 litters in one week, thats 24 puppies plus any breeding adults. That fits right in with the bill that says if you sell more than 5 puppies in one year, you are a commercial breeder.
These bills are badly worded and until they are worded correctly and wont effect me, I will never vote for them.

[Nancy1999]

Originally Posted by yorkiekist

AKC always makes me aware of these bills and have lists and all e-mail addys of who to write to. I dont think that there are too many commercial breeders registering with AKC anymore because of the DNA and inspections. I dont know if the dogs /pitbulls used in fighting are registered with AKC or not. The breed clubs make us well aware also. I believe these bills will effect the small breeder as well as the commercial ones. Some bills go so far as to tell you exactly how big your kennel must be, all veterinary procedures and medications must be administered by a vet, cant ship across certain state lines, must have mandatory worming and on and on. I do alot of "veterinary" procedures myself, just to cut costs and un-needed stress on the dogs. Everytime I go to the vet, I increase the chance of bringing home parvo. I do my own tails and dews, give my own shots(except rabies), buy alot of medications/supplies/supplements from Revival, and worm my own dogs only if needed. If some of these micro-manage type bills pass, I will have to go to the vet for every flippin thing.
Other bills want a 20 dog limit of un-altered dogs over 16 weeks of age. How stupid is that? We here on YT usually only think of a small litter of 3. What about Labrador breeders whos average litter is 8? If they have 3 litters in one week, thats 24 puppies plus any breeding adults. That fits right in with the bill that says if you sell more than 5 puppies in one year, you are a commercial breeder.
These bills are badly worded and until they are worded correctly and wont effect me, I will never vote for them.

I don't blame you, I know Joey's breeder feels exactly the same way you do.

[yorkiekist]

Originally Posted by Nancy1999

I don't blame you, I know Joey's breeder feels exactly the same way you do.

I know these bills are supposed to mean well and are supposedly aimed at the mills. I just think they are headed down a slippery slope.

[Breeze]

Originally Posted by yorkiekist

I dont have the hang of multiple quotes yet but I would like to say thank you to Nancy, AshleyV and Nikki+2. You have said very nice things about me and you do not know how much that means to me.
The puppy mill issue is sooooooo HUGE!! Almost to the point of over-whelming. I will be the first to admit that I do get a little carried away sometimes. Please read all of the legislation that is trying to be passed. In these bills, responsible breeders are exactly the same as puppy mills. There is no differential treatment. These bills are being spurred on by peta and H$ who have millions of dollars and strong lobbyists in every state. These "demonstrations" do point out puppy mills, which is good up to a point. But it also gives uneducated people a bad image of ALL breeders, not just the mills. As Nancy said, no one is watching the back of the good breeders. We will also be subject to every fine, fee, intrusion of private life, home invasions, strict micro-mangement, and siezure of our dogs that we have spent our blood, sweat and tears for. Alot of the good breeders have spent YEARS perfecting the breed of their choice. Good breeders have spent their hard earned money on health research, breed education,dog ownership education, shows, field trials, handicap dogs, search and rescue dogs and all of it for the love of the breed. Good breeders are the mentors for newbies wanting to "get into" their breed of choice. Education and time spent with the 'newbies" is priceless. With the passage of each bill, the more all of these good things will dissappear to the point of the good breeder not being able to breed anymore. It will just be to expensive with all the added fines and fees and restictions put on us by these badly worded bills. I even put my showing on hold this year because of the economy. I cant afford it right now. But these is next year!! I hope you all can see where I am coming from on this issue. Personally I think that peta and H$ and the hecklers should go after the mills first. Without the mills, the pet stores will have no one to buy from. Back Yard Breeders will not accept the small amounts that the pet stores offer for their puppies. This will make it hard for a pet store to stay in business with no access to puppies.
Thats just how I see things. Lynn

Sorry if I offended any of you and seem obsessive. It just seems like its so easy to see the 'peta hsus' ideals and not the good breeder points of view.

I agree with all of your posts and ideas, views...


My advice is just to break up your posts with paragraph breaks making it all easier to read. I too, strain while reading them which makes your points get lost. You have a lot of important things to say, please make them easier to understand, we are here to support you.

[yorkiekist]

Originally Posted by Breeze

I agree with all of your posts and ideas, views...


My advice is just to break up your posts with paragraph breaks making it all easier to read. I too, strain while reading them which makes your points get lost. You have a lot of important things to say, please make them easier to understand, we are here to support you.

Thank you so much. I thought if I copy/paste it had to stay the same way.

[Ashley V]

Here are my views on the whole breeder thing: I do think there needs to be a license (not an expensive one) that is awarded once the breeder passes an inspection to say that basically they aren't a puppy mill and that the dogs are kept in good conditions (clean food, water, bedding), are handled with lots of love, and are vet checked regularly (by vet checked, I mean check ups, not vaccines because I know people do them sometimes on their own). I definitely don't agree with counting puppies as "unaltered" but I think they should put some limit on how many unaltered adult dogs are owned (maybe 10 max, puppies NOT included). And maybe not limit the amount of puppies sold in a year, but make a limit as to how many litters that each dam can produce in a year (that way they aren't overbred) and maybe put a cap on the age so they aren't bred until they are like 12 years old. I think if a breeder has a license than a buyer can feel safer knowing that the operation has been inspected and is okayed by authorities by meeting certain requirements (like the ones I've stated). If they limit the amount of unaltered dogs, then there won't be as many puppy mills because they'll get busted easier. If they limit the amount of how many litters a dam can have in a year and a stopping age for breeding, then she won't be overbred. Of course, there would always be room for exceptions. This is JMO from a buyer's prospective. As a buyer that is what I would want to see from a breeding program that I'm thinking of purchasing a puppy from.