Missouri and the Puppy Mill Cruelty Prevention Act

murraysmom · 10-20-2010, 08:41 AM

Philly Dawg

Quote from linked article 10/19 "Tuesday Wag":

"The battle over the fate of hundreds of thousands of puppy mill dogs reaches a crescendo in Missouri. Animal welfare advocates are urging voters to support a referendum known as Prop B or the Puppy Mill Cruelty Prevention Act that would mandate sweeping improvements to kennels in the puppy mill capital of the nation. Kennel operators and the farming interests are fighting to kill the referendum, which would require larger cages, annual veterinary care solid floors and set limits on the number of breeding dogs, saying it will put "reputable" kennels out of business. A recent article in Missouri quotes the Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture saying, that while two-thirds of Pennsylvania commercial kennels have closed since the dog law passed in 2008, it's been a positive thing for the state. "It sends the message that the law closes down bad kennels and good ones provide higher level of standards for dogs," said Bob Baker, who helped write the Pennsylvania dog law in 1982 and is now executive director of Missouri Alliance for Animal Legislation. "

Soundtrack · 10-20-2010, 12:39 PM

The Missouri Veterinary Medical Association is against it - with good reason.

Statement From Missouri Veterinary Medical Association Against Prop B - 24thState

"Picking a Reputable, Licensed Dog Breeding Facility Missouri Veterinary Medical Association member veterinarians care very much about the welfare of dogs in breeding facilities in our state.
We have devoted our lives to the treatment of animals and the prevention of suffering and pain. We agree that there is a ‘puppy mill’ problem in Missouri and we want to resolve it.
The issue of the Puppy Mill Cruelty Prevention Act has come about because breeding facilities that are unlicensed are not being regulated or inspected.
For a side-by-side comparison of the Proposition B ballot initiative and the current Missouri Animal Care Facilities Act click here.
Our state has good existing laws (Click here for current Missouri dog breeder regulations), but those laws need enforcement.
Cases of neglect and bad conditions have come mainly from unlicensed breeders who are not overseen by state inspection.
Passing blanket initiatives (Click to view a copy of the ballot initiative) without careful consideration of the facts and ignoring existing law is not in the best interest of the dogs we are trying to protect.
The MVMA believes the answer lies in adequate funding for more inspections and better enforcement. You can do your part by making certain your next puppy is not from a puppy mill.
Report them, don’t support them! Click here for "Operation Bark Alert" reporting site. For more information, ask your veterinarian for a brochure on “How to Choose a Puppy” or click here to view a copy.
Prop B isn't about animal welfare or puppy cruelty. It's about adding regulations to the pet industry that can be used as a wedge for future legislation and enforcement. Read the laws on the book. Vote No on Prop B."

If you check the side-by-side comparison, almost immediately you will find this statement:
"A proposed statutory amendment filed with the Missouri Secretary of State by the Humane Society of the United States."

HSUS is an organization dedicated to the elimination of all breeders, and eventually all domestic animals. Their strategy is to introduce legislation that seems benign and helpful, but is designed to be tightened and made more restrictive at a later date out of the glare of publicity.

Keep in mind that the laws assume that dogs are kept in a kennel. Breeders who keep their dogs in their homes, whelp their puppies in their bedrooms or living rooms, actually live with and enjoy their dogs, would be in violation.

Kirska · 10-20-2010, 04:56 PM

I don't claim to support HSUS. I have never donated to them and I never intend to as their pockets are deep enough already and I don't agree with everything they do. I feel the same way about PETA. I am much more comfortable supporting ASPCA and Best Friends, though I am generally more involved with local issues and local shelters.

All that said, I think the all out war against HSUS is a bit over the top. Quite frankly, the complaints/arguments/battles against welfare organizations by breeders (reputable or not) only makes the gap between animal activists and breeders wider.

Mikey T · 10-20-2010, 10:28 PM

HSUS is not nor ever was an animal welfare organization they are and always have been an animals rights organization mask through there name their true intent.

Hell it is discraeful that a they have a convicted animal rights terrorist on the payroll and as a major spokesmAn on animal fighting issues.

Ad Condemns Humane Society of the United States for Terror Fundraising

The ACC Connection
designed to help researchers with questions regarding animal research at the University of Connecticut Health Center.

Quote:

The HSUS aims to completely end the use and ownership of animals. In 1980, at a national conference, it was formally
resolved that HSUS would “pursue on all fronts… the clear articulation and establishment of the rights of all animals…
within the full range of American life and culture.” Members of HSUS management (e.g., John Goodwin) have been ALF
members with lengthy arrest records and the promotion of arson to accomplish animal liberation even though HSUS has a
corporate policy of not endorsing violence as a protest tactic. Other management personnel are known to be financial
supporters of ALF and the violence that they do. HSUS has made financial contributions toward “WASTE.org” which was an internet website and the main distribution point for communications of ALF.

Though the assets of the HSUS are over $125 million dollars, they gave less than $150,000 dollars to hands-on humane societies and animal shelters. Despite HSUS’ public claims that it wants to ensure that animals are treated humanely, the organization’s values are geared toward eliminating humans’ use of animals entirely. HSUS leaders have expressed the desire to put an end the use of animals in biomedical research; in 1986, then-VP John McArdle expressed the opinion that brain-dead humans should be substituted for animals in medical research. He then instructed HSUS members to “avoid
the words ‘animal rights’- they are too strange for the public. Never appear to be opposed to animal research. Claim that your only concern is the source of animals”.

Unmarked Anniversary: A Dozen Years on HSUS's Payroll

Quote:

In April 1993 Goodwin was sentenced to three years in jail as the ringleader of a gang vandalizing fur stores. He spent 30 months under house arrest, finishing his sentence at 22.

Humane Society of the United States - Black Eye

The PA dog law has standards that the average homeowner can not meat in regard to temperature control and ventilation. It goes well beyond regulating humane treatment They require air conditioning and ventaltion system that turns the air over multiple time an hours Which of course require expensive heat exchanger to be efficient because it is way to expensive to cool air that is only allowed to be in the building for minutes. Keep in mind as with all regulation these standars will trickle down,

Hech the standard for the PA dog law a more strick than OSHA requirement for humans

Mikey T · 10-20-2010, 10:56 PM

Quote:

gap between animal activists and breeders wider.

Can't be much wider when the mission of animal activist like PEtA and HSUS is to end Pet ownership and breeding. just read the statement made by their leaders

Quotes from the leaders of the animal rights movement

Quote:

“I don’t have a hands-on fondness for animals…To this day I don’t feel bonded to any non-human animal. I like them and I pet them and I’m kind to them, but there’s no special bond between me and other animals.” Wayne Pacelle quoted in Bloodties: Nature, Culture and the Hunt by Ted Kerasote, 1993, p. 251, before joining the HSUS.

...We have no ethical obligation to preserve the different breeds of livestock produced through selective breeding. . One generation and out. We have no problem with the extinction of domestic animals. They are creations of human selective breeding." Wayne Pacelle, Senior VP of Humane Society of the US, formerly of Friends of Animals and Fund for Animals, Animal People, May, 1993

...When asked if he envisioned a future without pets, “If I had my personal view, perhaps that might take hold. In fact, I don’t want to see another dog or cat born.” Wayne Pacelle quoted in Bloodties: Nature, Culture and the Hunt by Ted Kerasote, 1993, p. 266.

murraysmom · 10-21-2010, 05:47 AM

I'm surrounded by puppymills here in Lancaster County Pa.- there are hell holes with 600 dogs within 25 miles of my home. So I fought for the passage of the 2008 Dog Law, and every time a puppymill goes out of business because it can't afford to comply with the new regulations I celebrate.

The people who fought for the dog law around here are not members of PETA and don't want to see an end to domestic breeding of animals or see reputable kennels which maintain decent conditions for their dogs shut down.We just want the puppymills out of Pennsylvania. For me this has been a local issue.

I do realize that the Dog Law in this state has national implications and has attracted alot of folks with political agendas on both sides of the issue. The sporting groups have used fear tactics pretty consistantly to push their point :"The laws will trickle down; it will be you next". Personally, I don't see that happening, and I don't like fear tactics used to push an agenda.

I debated the Dog Law on this forum with Mike last year, and think it was a good debate and helped to show people both sides of the issue. But at this point I think I've said all I care to say.

Soundtrack · 10-21-2010, 07:21 AM

Quote:

every time a puppymill goes out of business because it can't afford to comply with the new regulations I celebrate

And what about every time a good breeder has to quit for the same reason?

The hell holes are already in violation of existing laws - those laws need to be enforced and real penalties need to be applied to those who abuse and neglect animals. We don't need to introduce new laws that create hardship for the innocent along with the guilty - and pave the way for the animal rights agenda.

Although people like you who care about animals and support these things are not necessarily PETA/HSUS supporters, you are still advancing their cause. I would love to see puppymills shut down. I don't like commercial breeders. I hate BYBs. But the solution is not more knee-jerk laws based on emotion that punish the innocent along with the guilty. BSL is the most blatant example of this - in my province, in order to solve the "problem" of pit bull attacks (perpetrated by maybe .01% of the pit bull population) thousands of innocent and friendly dogs have been taken from their families and killed because they "look like" a pit bull (which is all that's required under the legislatioin to earn a death sentence whether the dog is a PB or not - if AC or other official thinks your dog fits the description your doe is labeled as a PB and you have to prove it's not).

As for the law itself, there are requirements with which a good kennel owner Would NOT comply. Can't go over it all from mobile, but for example the requirement that dogs must have Constant access to the outside. Think about that. Do YOUR dogs have constant access to the outdoors? Do most pets? Do they need it? There are lots of good reasons why a kennel owner would NOT allow free access to the outside. Most kennel owners will lock the dogs inside for the night, for security reasons and to keep the dogs from being a nuisance by barking at night. Many will lock the dogs inside while they are gone from the premises, again for security reasons. One breeder I know will lock the pop doors when a snow storm is expected - she doesn't want to take a chance on the doors getting jammed with snow while the dog is outside. Pregnant bitches near term should NEVER be allowed free access to outside - responsible breeders will accompany her out, bringing a flashlight if it's dark to avoid having a puppy born and lost outside (it happens). Just this one section alone is BAD animal husbandry, written by people who either do not know or do not care about proper practices.

Kirska · 10-21-2010, 12:16 PM

Quote:

Can't be much wider when the mission of animal activist like PEtA and HSUS is to end Pet ownership and breeding. just read the statement made by their leaders

Please don't equate animal rights activists as a whole to PETA or HSUS, especially one single person. The vast majority of groups like ASPCA and Best Friends advocate responsible pet ownership. To suggest that the common animal rights activist opposes pet ownership is laughable. I have been to puppy mill opposition events before and everyone there is a dog lover, including the stereotypical PETA vegans, many of which bring their dogs with them.

If one man in HSUS wants to eliminate pet ownership, he has 110 million American households to go.

I was referring to the gap between your common everyday rescue activist and breeders.

Soundtrack · 10-21-2010, 01:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kirska

I was referring to the gap between your common everyday rescue activist and breeders.

Perhaps the gap is widened by the many rescue activists who tell people that there are NO "good" breeders and spout slogans like "Don't breed or buy while shelter animals die"?

Our local rescue is excellent and supportive of good breeders (heck, it was started by breeders), however I've come across many whose attitude is frankly disturbing. I attended a rescue event in the US where the anti-breeder undercurrent was enough to make me quite uncomfortable.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kirska

If one man in HSUS wants to eliminate pet ownership, he has 110 million American households to go.

Even if that one man happens to be the head of the organization? You think they're not following his agenda?

How about the former Vice President of HSUS?
“Humane care (of animals) is simply sentimental, sympathetic patronage.” Dr. Michael W. Fox, Humane Society of the United States, in 1988 Newsweek interview."

Former CEO

"Don’t breed dogs, don’t buy, don’t even accept giveaways"

HSUS CEO John Hoyt in a 1991 speech.

"My goal is the abolition of all animal agriculture." Statement made on "AR-Views," an animalrights Internet discussion group,

J P Goodwin, HSUS Grassroots Coordinator while executive director of the Coalition to Abolish the Fur Trade

See a trend?

Then there's PeTA and it's head, Ingrid Newkirk:

“One day, we would like an end to pet shops and the breeding of animals. [Dogs] would pursue their natural lives in the wild ... they would have full lives, not wasting at home for someone to come home in the evening and pet them and then sit there and watch TV.”
— The Chicago Daily Herald, Mar 1990

“The bottom line is that people don't have the right to manipulate or to breed dogs and cats... If people want toys, they should buy inanimate objects. If they want companionship, they should seek it with their own kind.”
— Animals, May 1993

“I don’t use the word 'pet.' I think it’s speciesist language. I prefer 'companion animal.' For one thing, we would no longer allow breeding. People could not create different breeds. There would be no pet shops. If people had companion animals in their homes, those animals would have to be refugees from the animal shelters and the streets. You would have a protective relationship with them just as you would with an orphaned child. But as the surplus of cats and dogs (artificially engineered by centuries of forced breeding) declined, eventually companion animals would be phased out, and we would return to a more symbiotic relationship – enjoyment at a distance.”
— The Harper's Forum Book, Jack Hitt, ed., 1989, p.223

“Pet ownership is an absolutely abysmal situation brought about by human manipulation.”
— Harper's, Aug 1988

“In the end, I think it would be lovely if we stopped this whole notion of pets altogether.”
— Newsday, Feb 1988

“There is no hidden agenda. If anybody wonders about -- what’s this with all these reforms -- you can hear us clearly. Our goal is total animal liberation. [emphasis added]”
— “Animal Rights 2002” convention, Jun 2002

And another quote from our friend, Wayne:
"I want to achieve greater effectiveness and create an even more powerful organization to advance major social changes. ... I've tried to focus the organization on a few key reforms because I believe the only way we are going to achieve change is by putting enough muscle behind specific campaigns - to change the views of policy-makers, corporate decision-makers, and get issues into the media - and to create a grassroots movement to drive these issues forward. So we're first focusing on factory farming, the greatest of all animal abuses as measured in terms of animals involved and the duration and acuteness of their suffering."
(In an interview with Satya magazine, June 2005)

Kirska · 10-21-2010, 04:17 PM

If more good breeders came out of the woodwork and helped with everyday rescue responsibilities like walking dogs, training dogs, and taking dogs to adoption events, perhaps rescue workers would feel differently. I have not met a single breeder that volunteers in my time volunteering at the shelter and there are over 600 volunteers.

I hear and see breeders say how involved they are yet I have never once actually seen one out doing something worthwhile. The only thing I have witnessed is breeders occasionally taking in foster dogs for breed specific rescues and, admittedly, that is certainly great work. Most homeless dogs aren't lucky enough for a breed specific rescue to pick them up.

Perhaps I am just unlucky and haven't come across one (or they are hiding this fact, which to me is counterproductive), but it is frustrating to see how much time, money, and effort people use to keep dogs from "running out of time" while the people creating more dogs make no effort to help them, especially considering how many of those dogs running out of time are purebred dogs. I have seen at least a dozen purebred bassets go through the shelter this year.

If the breeders opposed to the puppy mill took the time they've spent fighting it and applied it to helping to get rid of the mills in the first place, perhaps the whole bill wouldn't be necessary at all. If breeders want rescuers to support their cause, sitting around doing nothing until a bill appears that is inconvenient for them is not the way to do it.

10-20-2010, 08:41 AM	#1 (permalink)
murraysmom Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: southcentral Pa. Posts: 2,235	Missouri and the Puppy Mill Cruelty Prevention Act Philly Dawg Quote from linked article 10/19 "Tuesday Wag": "The battle over the fate of hundreds of thousands of puppy mill dogs reaches a crescendo in Missouri. Animal welfare advocates are urging voters to support a referendum known as Prop B or the Puppy Mill Cruelty Prevention Act that would mandate sweeping improvements to kennels in the puppy mill capital of the nation. Kennel operators and the farming interests are fighting to kill the referendum, which would require larger cages, annual veterinary care solid floors and set limits on the number of breeding dogs, saying it will put "reputable" kennels out of business. A recent article in Missouri quotes the Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture saying, that while two-thirds of Pennsylvania commercial kennels have closed since the dog law passed in 2008, it's been a positive thing for the state. "It sends the message that the law closes down bad kennels and good ones provide higher level of standards for dogs," said Bob Baker, who helped write the Pennsylvania dog law in 1982 and is now executive director of Missouri Alliance for Animal Legislation. "

10-20-2010, 12:39 PM	#2 (permalink)
Soundtrack Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada Posts: 2,580	The Missouri Veterinary Medical Association is against it - with good reason. Statement From Missouri Veterinary Medical Association Against Prop B - 24thState "Picking a Reputable, Licensed Dog Breeding Facility Missouri Veterinary Medical Association member veterinarians care very much about the welfare of dogs in breeding facilities in our state. We have devoted our lives to the treatment of animals and the prevention of suffering and pain. We agree that there is a ‘puppy mill’ problem in Missouri and we want to resolve it. The issue of the Puppy Mill Cruelty Prevention Act has come about because breeding facilities that are unlicensed are not being regulated or inspected. For a side-by-side comparison of the Proposition B ballot initiative and the current Missouri Animal Care Facilities Act click here. Our state has good existing laws (Click here for current Missouri dog breeder regulations), but those laws need enforcement. Cases of neglect and bad conditions have come mainly from unlicensed breeders who are not overseen by state inspection. Passing blanket initiatives (Click to view a copy of the ballot initiative) without careful consideration of the facts and ignoring existing law is not in the best interest of the dogs we are trying to protect. The MVMA believes the answer lies in adequate funding for more inspections and better enforcement. You can do your part by making certain your next puppy is not from a puppy mill. Report them, don’t support them! Click here for "Operation Bark Alert" reporting site. For more information, ask your veterinarian for a brochure on “How to Choose a Puppy” or click here to view a copy. Prop B isn't about animal welfare or puppy cruelty. It's about adding regulations to the pet industry that can be used as a wedge for future legislation and enforcement. Read the laws on the book. Vote No on Prop B." If you check the side-by-side comparison, almost immediately you will find this statement: "A proposed statutory amendment filed with the Missouri Secretary of State by the Humane Society of the United States." HSUS is an organization dedicated to the elimination of all breeders, and eventually all domestic animals. Their strategy is to introduce legislation that seems benign and helpful, but is designed to be tightened and made more restrictive at a later date out of the glare of publicity. Keep in mind that the laws assume that dogs are kept in a kennel. Breeders who keep their dogs in their homes, whelp their puppies in their bedrooms or living rooms, actually live with and enjoy their dogs, would be in violation. __________________ Rosie-Ch Soundtrack Cracklin' Rose CGN AGN RA Am RN TT Melody-Ch Soundtrack Unchained Melody TT Sailor-Ch Soundtrack Expedition Sailor RN TT Chili-Ch Soundtrack Spice Up Your Life Curry-Ch Soundtrack Canadian Brass Pepper-Ch Pennieslogon Living La Vida Loca CGN Vina-Ch Soundtrack Grand Illusion Leila-Ch Soundtrack Almost Paradise Deela-Ch Soundtrack Wink Of An Eye Hermione - Soundtrack Spellbound Eowyn - Soundtrack Rain Dance

10-20-2010, 04:56 PM	#3 (permalink)
Kirska Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Dallas, TX Posts: 932	I don't claim to support HSUS. I have never donated to them and I never intend to as their pockets are deep enough already and I don't agree with everything they do. I feel the same way about PETA. I am much more comfortable supporting ASPCA and Best Friends, though I am generally more involved with local issues and local shelters. All that said, I think the all out war against HSUS is a bit over the top. Quite frankly, the complaints/arguments/battles against welfare organizations by breeders (reputable or not) only makes the gap between animal activists and breeders wider. __________________ Mom to Anabelle and Lila, rescued ladies and Harley, Corgi/Beagle/Basset/?? mutt "Saving just one dog won't change the world, but it surely will change the world for that one dog." - Richard C. Call

10-21-2010, 04:17 PM	#10 (permalink)
Kirska Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Dallas, TX Posts: 932	If more good breeders came out of the woodwork and helped with everyday rescue responsibilities like walking dogs, training dogs, and taking dogs to adoption events, perhaps rescue workers would feel differently. I have not met a single breeder that volunteers in my time volunteering at the shelter and there are over 600 volunteers. I hear and see breeders say how involved they are yet I have never once actually seen one out doing something worthwhile. The only thing I have witnessed is breeders occasionally taking in foster dogs for breed specific rescues and, admittedly, that is certainly great work. Most homeless dogs aren't lucky enough for a breed specific rescue to pick them up. Perhaps I am just unlucky and haven't come across one (or they are hiding this fact, which to me is counterproductive), but it is frustrating to see how much time, money, and effort people use to keep dogs from "running out of time" while the people creating more dogs make no effort to help them, especially considering how many of those dogs running out of time are purebred dogs. I have seen at least a dozen purebred bassets go through the shelter this year. If the breeders opposed to the puppy mill took the time they've spent fighting it and applied it to helping to get rid of the mills in the first place, perhaps the whole bill wouldn't be necessary at all. If breeders want rescuers to support their cause, sitting around doing nothing until a bill appears that is inconvenient for them is not the way to do it. __________________ Mom to Anabelle and Lila, rescued ladies and Harley, Corgi/Beagle/Basset/?? mutt "Saving just one dog won't change the world, but it surely will change the world for that one dog." - Richard C. Call

10-21-2010, 05:47 AM	#6 (permalink)
murraysmom Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: southcentral Pa. Posts: 2,235	I'm surrounded by puppymills here in Lancaster County Pa.- there are hell holes with 600 dogs within 25 miles of my home. So I fought for the passage of the 2008 Dog Law, and every time a puppymill goes out of business because it can't afford to comply with the new regulations I celebrate. The people who fought for the dog law around here are not members of PETA and don't want to see an end to domestic breeding of animals or see reputable kennels which maintain decent conditions for their dogs shut down.We just want the puppymills out of Pennsylvania. For me this has been a local issue. I do realize that the Dog Law in this state has national implications and has attracted alot of folks with political agendas on both sides of the issue. The sporting groups have used fear tactics pretty consistantly to push their point :"The laws will trickle down; it will be you next". Personally, I don't see that happening, and I don't like fear tactics used to push an agenda. I debated the Dog Law on this forum with Mike last year, and think it was a good debate and helped to show people both sides of the issue. But at this point I think I've said all I care to say.

Remove Advertisements Sponsored Links
Basset.net Advertisement