Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Darnright
According to their Facebook page, they are for it at this time?

"NAIA gave considerable input during the formulation of these rules. Now, we can only hope they have not added further changes that we cannot support."

http://www.facebook.com/pages/National-Animal-Interest-Alliance-NAIA/98942497243
34 posted on 05/11/2012 8:28:37 AM PDT by Gennie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies ]


To: Gennie

>According to their Facebook page, they are for it at this time?<

Here’s a quote from Strand off the FB comments on this subject:

“As you might imagine, seeing all the buzzwords and having my quote placed immediately after Wayne’s made me more than a little uncomfortable, too. I understand everyone’s concern. Many of the people posting here didn’t realize at first that this is a proposed rule, and none had been able to read it for themselves yet.

At NAIA we have said for decades that one of the distinguishing characteristics between the commercial breeders and us, especially when it comes to regulation, is that the dog-buying public can see the puppies, littermates, dam and in some cases the relatives of the puppy they are buying, when they buy from us”

Frankly, I am beyond disappointed in Ms Strand and NAIA at this point. Four, 4 month and up females in a non-commercial dog breeder/exhibitor’s home is in no way unusual nor is it indicative of “volume” breeding activity.


38 posted on 05/11/2012 8:46:20 AM PDT by Darnright ("I don't trust liberals, I trust conservatives." - Lucius Annaeus Seneca)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies ]

To: Gennie

Another relevant post by Strand (although I’m sorry, I don’t buy it. Spin faster, Patti.

“First, no one including me knows what the final proposal will be as it has not been published yet. The AP called me for a comment and I replied to the limited information the writer provided me. There are a number of ways that my comments can be construed, but the part I responded to was the part that would exempt breeders who provide their purchasers access to their home or kennel. The devil is always in the details, though, so rest assured that if the proposal in its entirety turns out to be unreasonable, we won’t support it.

Keep in mind that this is a “proposed rule” which requires public input before finalizing. In other words, hobby breeders will have the opportunity to write them and push for changes and/or better methods of implementation if the proposal is unreasonable. The USDA has the authority to draft the regulations needed to implement laws already on the books and no one doubts their authority in this matter. What’s important now is giving them the right input after we’ve all had a chance to read it.”


39 posted on 05/11/2012 8:51:31 AM PDT by Darnright ("I don't trust liberals, I trust conservatives." - Lucius Annaeus Seneca)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson