[Darnright]

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.”

[Gennie]

Push for changes? How about SCRAP all of it? Hang on though, because from me picking more into this actual proposal, it looks like those exempt with the 4 dogs or less would STILL have to sell from their property, meaning those who have less dogs but still want to ship a puppy would have to be licensed? It's hard reading this stuff with kids, but here is what I'm talking about:

In addition, the proposed rule would increase from three to four the number of breeding female dogs, cats, and/or small exotic or wild mammals that a person may maintain on his or her premises and be exempt from licensing and inspection if he or she sells only the offspring of those animals born and raised on his or her premises for use as pets or exhibition, regardless of whether those animals are sold at retail or wholesale.