TLCPETS Posted January 12, 2003 Share Posted January 12, 2003 I wonder if it is ok to continue the USDA thread.This is a very important issue for every breeder.It does not look any better since the show breeder got arrested on the US border coming from Alaska with 171 dogs and no regulations.There are 1,000s of breeders out there who have over 100 dogs with no regulations.How do they fall in the loophole (retail pet store). Most retail pet stores have set hours and days of operation when anyone can go in and browse as long as they want.How many breeders have thier home open to the public like a retail pet store? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poofy Posted January 12, 2003 Share Posted January 12, 2003 I am sitting on the edge of the razor on this topic. I think that they need rules, but the rules they have stink. Firstly, the USDA as well as local agriculture officials, already have more work then they can handle. They are so over worked that they can only "catch" the bad guys when they are liscensed...well...what if they don't get liscensed...they don't have the time or money to persue them...especially if they are breeding on a small scale. This is where I think that AKC should pick up the slack...they need to be willing to provide inspectors (CFA and TICA do it), for areas that have laws and need help inforcing them. I also think that the breed clubs and AKC ought to RE-WRITE the dog breeding rules, as it would apply to a breeder. Some of the requirements, right now, with my own state, make it very difficult to house dogs like I think they should be housed. The laws in my state are pretty lax too, compared to some...I dread what they might bring in if DDAL gets its way... Its all a bunch of bureaucracy. If those who were members of the national breed club, could be inspected by inspectors for the club, and be exempt from inspection from the state...I think that would help...but then we would be getting into another area, of possible polical agenda huh???? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TLCPETS Posted January 12, 2003 Author Share Posted January 12, 2003 [quote].they don't have the time or money to persue them...especially if they are breeding on a small scale.[/quote] I think the small scale breeder will be left out of being regulated. There is a middle ground here and I think soon it will be worked out. But I think the home retail pet store clause will no longer exist.It is too big of a loophole for BIG breeders to not be regulated.As for persuing them it is not hard to follow up on a (tip) from a regulated breeder who is playing by the rules. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Anonymous Posted January 12, 2003 Share Posted January 12, 2003 It;s the small scale breeder who NEEDS to be regualated. The one that gets his pet from a commercial establishment that doesn't care what the person does with the dog. This person breeds thier pet with no knowledge no experience, no health testing, no knowledge of the health problems in the pedigree, does no screening of buyers, puts an ad in the newspaper and sell to whomever comes. No health warranty, no take back clause, no spay and neuter. I feel the irresponsible breeders have ruined it for the rest of us. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hobbit Posted January 12, 2003 Share Posted January 12, 2003 I don't think the irresponsible breeders have ruined it for me. Maybe I'm just confident in my program. :wink: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Anonymous Posted January 12, 2003 Share Posted January 12, 2003 You are a breeder? You sure dont sound like a breeder to me, no offense meant. and they have ruined it for everyone. Why do you think the AR fanatics want all breeders regulated? it technically is better advertisement for me, and those that do it right. The educated public knows the difference. but I am a little nervous about these laws being passed by the AR fanatics. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hobbit Posted January 12, 2003 Share Posted January 12, 2003 Sandy, I meant as far as rules and regulations. DO NOT judge me, until you know me. You may be just bitting your own foot. :wink: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Anonymous Posted January 12, 2003 Share Posted January 12, 2003 I did also mean the rules and regulations. The AR fanatics want it to be enforced for ALL breeders. of course that is not possible considering all the one time breeders there are, breeding thier pets with no knowledge. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TLCPETS Posted January 12, 2003 Author Share Posted January 12, 2003 I do not think the purpose of the AWA was to leave out breeders with 100s of dogs so the loophole was there for pet stores who do not breed.It got changed out of context somehow.There has to be a set minimum number of dogs a person can keep without falling under the AWA. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TLCPETS Posted January 12, 2003 Author Share Posted January 12, 2003 How many dogs do you folks think a breeder should have before they should need regulations.I think 5 living in a barn outside or 5 living most of the day and night in pet taxies in the spare room/basement is too many.But 5 running through the house all trained or in a fenced back yard is admissible. But every-one has different opinions as to what should be permitted.Some-one has to make some rules for everybody. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TLCPETS Posted January 12, 2003 Author Share Posted January 12, 2003 [quote name='sandyb']I did also mean the rules and regulations. The AR fanatics want it to be enforced for ALL breeders. of course that is not possible considering all the one time breeders there are, breeding thier pets with no knowledge.[/quote] This is the hold-up.The DDAL from what my previous inspecter said wanted every-one with over 3 intact females regulated.He said USDA thought 30 intact females or less should not require regulations.I think AKC thinks anyone who has over 9 litters per year is high volume.So we have 3 different opinions.Where should the line be drawn to be fair for everybody? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hobbit Posted January 12, 2003 Share Posted January 12, 2003 [quote name='sandyb']I did also mean the rules and regulations. The AR fanatics want it to be enforced for ALL breeders. of course that is not possible considering all the one time breeders there are, breeding thier pets with no knowledge.[/quote] I am still not worried. I have worked for the government -- both at the Federal and State level. There simply is not enough inspectors to go around. There is not enough money to fund a project that would be of this magnitude. USDA has other more important issues concerning *human* lives. It may have to go to the Supreme Court and it well may pass. USDA will shake their heads and say, yes sir/yes ma'am, and it may take an inspector 20 years to get around to all the places that are perceived to be out of compliance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hobbit Posted January 12, 2003 Share Posted January 12, 2003 [quote name='TLCPETS']How many dogs do you folks think a breeder should have before they should need regulations.I think 5 living in a barn outside or 5 living most of the day and night in pet taxies in the spare room/basement is too many.But 5 running through the house all trained or in a fenced back yard is admissible. But every-one has different opinions as to what should be permitted.Some-one has to make some rules for everybody.[/quote] It is the amount of or the LACK of care that is of concern. Care being the care of the animal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TLCPETS Posted January 12, 2003 Author Share Posted January 12, 2003 [quote name='Hobbit'][quote name='sandyb']I did also mean the rules and regulations. The AR fanatics want it to be enforced for ALL breeders. of course that is not possible considering all the one time breeders there are, breeding thier pets with no knowledge.[/quote] I am still not worried. I have worked for the government -- both at the Federal and State level. There simply is not enough inspectors to go around. There is not enough money to fund a project that would be of this magnitude. USDA has other more important issues concerning *human* lives. It may have to go to the Supreme Court and it well may pass. USDA will shake their heads and say, yes sir/yes ma'am, and it may take an inspector 20 years to get around to all the places that are perceived to be out of compliance.[/quote] Either way I think a lot of breeder will just stop breeding.A lot will not, but when/if they get caught they will have to pay the price.If it is placed in the (rules) they can confiscate the dogs if in violation they can start over but now they are (on the list).JMO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hobbit Posted January 12, 2003 Share Posted January 12, 2003 [quote name='TLCPETS'][quote name='Hobbit'][quote name='sandyb']I did also mean the rules and regulations. The AR fanatics want it to be enforced for ALL breeders. of course that is not possible considering all the one time breeders there are, breeding thier pets with no knowledge.[/quote] I am still not worried. I have worked for the government -- both at the Federal and State level. There simply is not enough inspectors to go around. There is not enough money to fund a project that would be of this magnitude. USDA has other more important issues concerning *human* lives. It may have to go to the Supreme Court and it well may pass. USDA will shake their heads and say, yes sir/yes ma'am, and it may take an inspector 20 years to get around to all the places that are perceived to be out of compliance.[/quote] Either way I think a lot of breeder will just stop breeding.A lot will not, but when/if they get caught they will have to pay the price.If it is placed in the (rules) they can confiscate the dogs if in violation they can start over but now they are (on the list).JMO.[/quote] USDA is not an enforcement agency. Any confiscation would have to be done at the State level if delegated. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TLCPETS Posted January 12, 2003 Author Share Posted January 12, 2003 [quote]USDA is not an enforcement agency. Any confiscation would have to be done at the State level if delegated.[/quote] So why did DDAL petition USDA if they have no control?Don't lose me. Please. :drinking: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hobbit Posted January 12, 2003 Share Posted January 12, 2003 Because it has to be a "Federal" rule for a State to be able to enforce it. Unless the State is willing to pass ordinances. If Congress ordered the USDA to take on this project and write rule and regulations; these rules and reg's would then be delegated to the States (the 50 states) for enforcement. Like --- the Department of Environmental Quality is afforded the right to enforce the rules and reg's by adopting the Federal rules/reg's for water and air quality. Let me clarify something: Depending on how the rules and reg's are written --- the USDA/APHIS would or could enforce or they could delegate it to the State level. There must be funding for inspectors before anything can/could be done. There are more pet owners than Legislators, Congressmen, etc... and some of them have more than 3 intact females. If a State felt it was in their best interest, politically and financially, then they could surely request the delegation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hobbit Posted January 12, 2003 Share Posted January 12, 2003 The best thing to do is to contact your Legislator and Congressman and voice your opinion. The USDA does not regulate the amount of show cows, horses, sheep, goats that a person can have. There must be monies set aside, incentatives, cost shares etc... for a person to be brought into compliance. Without that, this is not likely to happen any time soon. The "goverment" is more concerned about the pending war with Iraq then this dog issue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poofy Posted January 12, 2003 Share Posted January 12, 2003 You said: "It;s the small scale breeder who NEEDS to be regualated. The one that gets his pet from a commercial establishment that doesn't care what the person does with the dog. This person breeds thier pet with no knowledge no experience, no health testing, no knowledge of the health problems in the pedigree, does no screening of buyers, puts an ad in the newspaper and sell to whomever comes. No health warranty, no take back clause, no spay and neuter." Firstly, we have to look at things, as in the eyes of our culture. I agree that all breeders, should be regulated. If only certain people should breed and certian dogs should be bred? Who is going to make those choices? And realistically, would you really want some one making those choices for you? You can't just have "good breeders should", if you want it done, then the regulation should effect everyone not just a chosen few. And then again....if only certain people should own dogs...then who will decided that? And when dealing with health warranties....what do you do, if the health of the dog, is affected by how a person keeps their dog? If it breaks, you must buy it back, attitude...can get you in trouble. Many breeders don't offer a health guarantee in writing, because they have been burned so many times. And once again...who will decide what your guarantee should cover. Open all these doors brings to light a greater issue. If dogs/cats are elevated to that level, then are they "animals" any more...and what other "rights" are they entitled too. At this point your role your eyes and say....thats not what I mean, or thats not what will happen, or even, don't be ridiculous....but I am telling you...that the courts will see differently when you start making arguments such as the above. And who will pay for the regulation? Inspectors would have to be hired, fines would be set. And how would they really investigate any one...short of gestapo tactics. See...its not as easy as one two three.... I wish it were.... I feel the irresponsible breeders have ruined it for the rest of us. I don't know why you feel they have ruined it for you...I don't buy their dogs. Yes there are people who have done some stupid things, that have brough about the issue for certian legislation...but that should not be ruining it for the rest of the people out there. What we need to do...is all get together, and get a better plan, then to just "make more laws"...they don't have the man power to enforce the laws that we do have...why make more? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TLCPETS Posted January 12, 2003 Author Share Posted January 12, 2003 I have said this before but it might have been overlooked.When USDA was taking comments 2 years ago there were 30,000 for regulating breeders and 4800 against.From the number of comments it looks like the general public wants breeders regulated.There is nowhere near as many breeders as there are J.Q.Public.The majority is speaking here and breeders are not the majority.If left up to individual states then federal grants would be in order to enforce what the public wanted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poofy Posted January 12, 2003 Share Posted January 12, 2003 yeah, but if they presented to the public, the BILLIONS in tax dollars that it is gonna cost for those regulations...they would probably change their tune...mighty quick... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hobbit Posted January 12, 2003 Share Posted January 12, 2003 Like I said.... Write, call, email your Legislators, Congress, Representatives...etc...instead of waiting for the train to hit you, at least TRY to get off the tracks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Anonymous Posted January 12, 2003 Share Posted January 12, 2003 [quote name='sandyb']You are a breeder? You sure dont sound like a breeder to me, no offense meant. [color=red][b]I think that's a compliment to Hobbit considering the kinds of breeders that have came to this forum lately. Hobbit knows his stuff. And while I've never met him, I can tell you that he is NOT a BYB or a Miller or anything even close. Hobbit loves all his animals. He is very intelligent and informative. He only wants to better the breed, and breed for it's purpose. His dogs are his children. [/b][/color]and they have ruined it for everyone. Why do you think the AR fanatics want all breeders regulated? it technically is better advertisement for me, and those that do it right. The educated public knows the difference. but I am a little nervous about these laws being passed by the AR fanatics.[/quote] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TLCPETS Posted January 12, 2003 Author Share Posted January 12, 2003 There are 1,000s of breeders out there who have over 100 dogs with no regulations.How do they fall in the loophole (retail pet store). Most retail pet stores have set hours and days of operation when anyone can go in and browse as long as they want.How many breeders have thier home open to the public like a retail pet store? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hobbit Posted January 13, 2003 Share Posted January 13, 2003 TLC --- have you, you personally, actually read the Animal Welfare Act? Or are you going by what someone has told you? Read the rules and reg's. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.