( takes a bow )
Posted on 06/15/2012 6:37:12 AM PDT by Gennie
If this ends up going through, and unless they want to be open to regulations, they will no longer be able to ship, along with a lot of other responsible breeders :(
If this ends up going through, and unless they want to be open to regulations and inspections, they will no longer be able to ship, along with a lot of other responsible breeders :(
( takes a bow )
Some of the 'complaints' may be due to change in diet, drinking water, etc. Assuming the USDA is not lying. But I never assume that any more.
Exactly. What is even worse, the puppy mills will get off scot-free while all the attention is focused on ethical breeders. PLEASE be heard on this issue. The ultimate goal is not only that breeding is stopped, but that companion animals (in addition to livestock) are outlawed, entirely. There has been- & is, legislation in every state (also locally) toward this very thing (e.g. pet limits & mandatory spay/ neuter) for several years now. Wayne Pacelle has stated openly that he hopes for the *extinction* of dogs. HSUS & PETA do *nothing* to “help” animals. They are about political power & control ONLY.
If you are so inclined, join one of the groups who are fighting back.
In Texas, responsiblepetowners.org
In California, petpac.org
Also see wwwhumanewatch.org for more information
We also breed GSDs. This, if put into effect, will kill us. We only breed 2-4 litters per year, but have 8 breeding females in various stages of growing out, in active breeding and training, and retirement. (We don’t generally spay our retired females, as we uncomfortable putting them under anesthesia at that age. They would be classified as breeding females, even though they might be 11-12 years old...) We regularly have 2-4 puppies and young dogs growing out, waiting until they are old enough for orthopedic certifications at 2 years. The regulations classify any intact female over 4 MONTHS OLD as a breeding female. It is ridiculous!! They are treating responsible hobby breeders as puppy mills!
But folks, the issue here is not shipping: it is internet sales! If you advertise/sell over the internet you are subject to these regulations. Doesn’t matter if you ship or not. And who does not have a website with dogs and puppies listed for sale? It is the only rational way to conduct business today. There is never enough local clients to sell all your puppies into good homes, you have to sell to non-local clients. This will kill that!
Go to the AKC website and sign the petition!
(If this goes through, this will destroy US breeders, and unfortunately, the breeds.)
We are members of D.O.G.S.
Dog Owners of the Granite State.
Along with the mushers, it seems we are up at the state house in Concord, NH at least once a year to fight this type of legislation. They try to push through something every year through the sponsorship of some well meaning but misinformed politition.
Yeah, I had seen this... My blood boils every time I see this...
This Deborah Howard is a blithering idiot. She obviously doesn’t know anything about purebred dogs and how they are bred, cared for, etc. by most hobby breeders. She cannot distiguish between puppy mills and reputable breeders.
This whole thing just needs to be totally repudiated.
If they implement this, it will kill our breed, as it will eliminate getting in new bloodlines from out of the country, and will eliminate placing and getting dogs outside of your local area. She must think that dogs should only be local and should have no interaction outside of your house. It is unbelievably stupid. These people have not clue on how to do anything but destroy other people’s livelihoods...
Yep, you got it.
We hobby breeders are screwed if this goes into effect. 25+ years of training/breeding experience made useless by some uneducated, “feel-good-about-myself” bureaucrat. I loath these people for what they are trying to do... One more example of what is wrong with this country, but it is hitting home hard...
This move by USDA is going to absolutely bloat the agency beyond all reason, assuming it’s actually followed. This is an absurd “solution” to essentially a non-existent problem and sweeps up large numbers of serious dog and cat lovers who’ve dedicated years to their animals.
Keep in mind, those of you who even think for a minute this is a good thing. Sweeping a breeder who has as few as 4 unspayed, over-4 month old females (who may or may not be in the owner’s breeding program), but who might have sent a puppy to ONE purchaser several states away condemns that seller to NOT being able to let his or her dogs live in the owner’s house. Yes, you read that right. Those dogs are prohibited from ever lying on the couch, by the fire, or having their litters in the owner’s bedroom.
This is horrific for the welfare not only of the dogs, which will not get the socialization needed to make sensible pets, it will destroy people’s lives - those animals are an enormous part of their lives. And, remember, this is nothing but a scheme to bloat government with more unnecessary workers and more bureaucratic layers.
There are already laws on the books to address animal cruelty and neglect. This nightmare of a plan will punish not only the human beings, it will drastically change the lives of their animals - not in a positive way.
Exactly :( If this passes, I don’t know what I’m going to do, as I have intact females that I have not bred but did want to have one litter out of and part of the reason I have the amount of dogs I do is for specific lineage. What a shame, this really will wipe out whole breeds and specific bloodlines.
You are right about it, the restrictions and regulations (I have not looked into it but I think I said earlier, something about stainless steel whelping boxes, ALL CONCRETE for flooring, etc.) would not be able to be done in people’s homes who are just hobby breeders. So sad :(
Yeah, we are in kind of the same boat, but most of the intact females we have right now are either too young to get their mandatory health screenings and certifications (therefore, we don’t even know if they are worth breeding yet), or are retired and will not be bred again. We really only have two females right now that I would consider “breeding females” and one of these we will probably only breed once. (That is out of 10 intact females we have right now: 3 retired, 5 growing out, 2 ready to breed). Like you, a lot of our dogs we only breed once or twice, for similar reasons that you stated.
Yes, this will play havoc with pure bred dog fanciers. It will destroy it as a hobby/sport, and will decimate breed-specific sports and breed shows, etc.
We have outdoor kennels (wood, not concrete) for the dogs that don't come inside, but all get to spend some time inside at some point in their lives, particularly on retirement (our house is the dog retirement home!). We generally have between 6-10 dogs inside with us at any one time (not including the 5 cats, and assorted guinea pigs, turtles, fish, gerbils).
We are not a puppy mill cranking out pups by the dozen all year and selling pups to all comers indiscriminately like a retail pet store! We rarely have more that 3 litters a year. We whelp ALL our litters inside, either in the kitchen or the adjoining room, and the pups do not get outside until their shots (after 6 weeks). We are extremely careful of letting outside visitors in during the time the pups are most vulnerable to disease (we mostly prohibit it). And we are very careful on selecting individual pups for individual owners, through careful screening of the prospective clients, and by living with and closely observing the pups through the first 8-9 weeks of their lives.
We do not need anyone looking over our shoulder telling us how to raise and care for our dogs, when they don't have anywhere near the experience that we do. They haven't a clue on what they are trying to regulate! (I doubt any of them even have pets... and even if they did, caring for pets is quite different from caring for breeding animals.)
These proposed regulations would prohibit all this! Talk about hypocrisy...
USDA regulations were written for commercial breeding establishments or for USDA brokers, not for hobbyists. The people who wrote them never intended them for the latter.
USDA regulations require separate housing, separate plumbing/sewer and the flooring and whelping materials you mention. Once again, this was never meant for the non-commercial, hobby dog or cat fancier.
The current administration has been using USDA as a plaything for some time now. People got payouts for being “minority farmers”, who have never seen a farm, much less who ever made a dime from farming. This is more of the same: make-work government jobs for imaginary work. Oh, and the fines will work great to redistribute more wealth from middle class people.
>We are not a puppy mill cranking out pups by the dozen all year and selling pups to all comers indiscriminately like a retail pet store!<
But, for USDA’s purposes, we in the hobby side of dog breeding have been shielded for generations because of this wording. USDA’s definition of “retail” is NOT a bad thing. You want to be considered to be under this umbrella.
“Retail” means, for these purposes, that you sell to the “end user”, aka the dog’s forever home. You do not sell to pet stores, who are also retail in that they sell to the dog’s final (one would hope) home.
Everything you say to me sounds like you are EXACTLY how we are. I am completely legal in my own state, Pennsylvania, because I stay under the limit. If you have 26 or more dogs and pups on your property, you need a license. Like the author of that piece I posted argued, they probably wouldn’t try to come after you or me, but the fact that they have it worded so they COULD means they don’t just care about large scale breeders, nor do they care about the animals. They just want power.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.