Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
As stated, I cannot back the PETA version, mostly because those people scare me. However, the school of thought I would subscribe to is that responsible breeders are furthering the line of dog they feel strongly about - not producing labradoodles and what have you, some sort of bastardization of the breeds. I agree that puppy mills don't breed AKC much of the time.....I don't care who papers them, or if they are papered - puppy mills are a problem, BUT NOT COMMERCIAL BREEDERS. Two entirely different things, a huge difference. Puppy mills as the public thinks of it are nasty, horrible places where dogs are kept in their own feces. Shut 'em down. Commercial breeders are already under AKC rules and are already toeing the mark.....so what's the problem?
Here is the California AB 1634 bill as it is proposed - and I can't see what the problem is other than the protest that the government is running it, which is a valid protest - but who would you have run it? In California alone from 1995 to 2005 the state spent $2.75 billion to house unwanted dogs and cats; of the 9 million animals that entered California’s shelters during that time, 5.2 million were euthanized. Guess who's running that program?
Article 3. Permits
122336.2. (a) A local jurisdiction shall issue an intact permit, as defined in subdivision (a) of Section 122336, if the owner provides sufficient proof, as determined by the local jurisdiction or its authorized local animal control agency, that any of the following conditions are met:
(1) The owner demonstrates, by providing a copy of his or her business license and federal and state tax number, or by other proof, as required by the local jurisdiction or its authorized local animal control agency, that he or she is doing business and is licensed as a breeder at a location for which the local jurisdiction or its authorized local animal control agency has issued a breeder license.
(2) The owner's cat or dog is a valid breed that is recognized by an approved registry or association, and complies with at least one of the following:
(A) His or her cat or dog is used to show or compete and has competed in at least one legitimate show or sporting competition hosted by, or under the approval of, a recognized registry or association within the last two years, or by whatever proof is requested by the local jurisdiction or its authorized local animal control agency that the cat or dog is being trained to show or compete and is too young to have yet competed.
(B) The cat or dog has earned, or if under two three years old, is in the process of earning, a conformation, obedience, agility, carting, herding, protection, rally, sporting, working, or other title from an approved purebred registry or association.
This is NOT going to rule out "pets" - everyone knows there is a pet quality and a show quality in every litter - what it DOES do is make those breeders accountable for what they turn out, which should be a good, solid bloodline. Otherwise, spay or neuter the pet quality. Period. Pretty soon you have true conformation breeds. Will they be more expensive? Oh, I'd betcha they would - but you would know what you're getting rather than finding out you have the result of sister and brother mating, or mother and son.
I believe we've made it too easy on the puppy mills - and incidentally, I don't think puppy mills are the largest problem we have...it's indiscriminate back yard breeders and hobby breeders. This will NOT affect legitimate, ethical breeders other than some increased fees. I'm sorry about that, but you do what you do. If you love a certain breed, you don't want to see it watered down.
As stated, I cannot back the PETA version, mostly because those people scare me. However, the school of thought I would subscribe to is that responsible breeders are furthering the line of dog they feel strongly about - not producing labradoodles and what have you, some sort of bastardization of the breeds. I agree that puppy mills don't breed AKC much of the time.....I don't care who papers them, or if they are papered - puppy mills are a problem, BUT NOT COMMERCIAL BREEDERS. Two entirely different things, a huge difference. Puppy mills as the public thinks of it are nasty, horrible places where dogs are kept in their own feces. Shut 'em down. Commercial breeders are already under AKC rules and are already toeing the mark.....so what's the problem?
Here is the California AB 1634 bill as it is proposed - and I can't see what the problem is other than the protest that the government is running it, which is a valid protest - but who would you have run it? In California alone from 1995 to 2005 the state spent $2.75 billion to house unwanted dogs and cats; of the 9 million animals that entered California’s shelters during that time, 5.2 million were euthanized. Guess who's running that program?
Article 3. Permits
122336.2. (a) A local jurisdiction shall issue an intact permit, as defined in subdivision (a) of Section 122336, if the owner provides sufficient proof, as determined by the local jurisdiction or its authorized local animal control agency, that any of the following conditions are met:
(1) The owner demonstrates, by providing a copy of his or her business license and federal and state tax number, or by other proof, as required by the local jurisdiction or its authorized local animal control agency, that he or she is doing business and is licensed as a breeder at a location for which the local jurisdiction or its authorized local animal control agency has issued a breeder license.
(2) The owner's cat or dog is a valid breed that is recognized by an approved registry or association, and complies with at least one of the following:
(A) His or her cat or dog is used to show or compete and has competed in at least one legitimate show or sporting competition hosted by, or under the approval of, a recognized registry or association within the last two years, or by whatever proof is requested by the local jurisdiction or its authorized local animal control agency that the cat or dog is being trained to show or compete and is too young to have yet competed.
(B) The cat or dog has earned, or if under two three years old, is in the process of earning, a conformation, obedience, agility, carting, herding, protection, rally, sporting, working, or other title from an approved purebred registry or association.
This is NOT going to rule out "pets" - everyone knows there is a pet quality and a show quality in every litter - what it DOES do is make those breeders accountable for what they turn out, which should be a good, solid bloodline. Otherwise, spay or neuter the pet quality. Period. Pretty soon you have true conformation breeds. Will they be more expensive? Oh, I'd betcha they would - but you would know what you're getting rather than finding out you have the result of sister and brother mating, or mother and son.
I believe we've made it too easy on the puppy mills - and incidentally, I don't think puppy mills are the largest problem we have...it's indiscriminate back yard breeders and hobby breeders. This will NOT affect legitimate, ethical breeders other than some increased fees. I'm sorry about that, but you do what you do. If you love a certain breed, you don't want to see it watered down.
Sam you only posted a portion of the bill...the portion you omitted is of great import. PETA's whole goal, and why they have sponcered this bill, is to eliminate all ownership of animals period! I agree with you Sam, but California AB 1634 does not.
MBG
Sam you only posted a portion of the bill...the portion you omitted is of great import. PETA's whole goal, and why they have sponcered this bill, is to eliminate all ownership of animals period! I agree with you Sam, but California AB 1634 does not.
MBG
Again - I cannot back the PETA version. I realize what is in the rest of the bill and I do not believe it will pass as stated.....however, I think this one section doesn't have anything objectionable in it. Sorry, that was my point and I didn't make it really too clear when I said the first two times I can't back anything PETA is a part of.
Again - I cannot back the PETA version. I realize what is in the rest of the bill and I do not believe it will pass as stated.....however, I think this one section doesn't have anything objectionable in it. Sorry, that was my point and I didn't make it really too clear when I said the first two times I can't back anything PETA is a part of.
I know you do not back it Sam... Just kind of thinking "out loud" here.
MBG
I know you do not back it Sam... Just kind of thinking "out loud" here.
MBG
Well, if you read the whole bill as amended, there are holes big enough to drive a truck through in the whole thing. There are allowances for working dogs, farm dogs, herding dogs, service dogs, old dogs, ill dogs, one litter per year, blah, blah, blah. It's a poorly worded piece of legislation, but the bottom line is that something has to be done. The California Veterinary Medical Association has withdrawn their support and changed their position to neutral with the amendments, but it seems their biggest concern was whether vets should be responsible for reporting spay/neuter stats. The bill has been amended and intact permits can be granted for up to one year.
The AKC has made an erroneous statement in that ANY purebred dog surrendered to a shelter "can immediately be placed with a rescue organization. Patently untrue. Ron Menaker is smoking dope if he thinks that's the case. Yes, this bill WILL penalize responsible pet owners....but what will it take to wake the public up? You may be responsible, but your neighbor isn't - until someone steps on some toes, even if it is the government, people will turn a blind eye to the true problems of animal overpopulation in this country. However, the bottom line is that increased fees will be demanded of breeders, along with an accounting for anyone who breeds over 20 animals per year - and I do think the majority of the bill is sound. If PETA had shut their mouths it probably would have flown through.
Reputable breeders will do the right thing regardless of the law....it's that other bunch out there that make the rescue world crazy.
Sam, tell me how is the law going to be enforced?? Tell me, how will this bill stop my neighbor from being an idiot? We already have laws here in Los Angeles county, and she does not even vacinate her pets!
Nothing will change for these idiots who let their cats and dogs roam and refuse to follow the laws. I will have to pay more and support more government waste by supporting more bureaucrats.
That is all that this bill will accomplish! Thank God that PETA supports it, and most hate PETA. BTW have been keeping up on it and I still do not support it!
MBG
And therein lies the inherent weakness of the bill...and the populace as a whole. No one wants to take responsibility.....not even the veterinarians, many of whom spend precious hours at shelters putting down the forgotten and discarded animals. If we can't even get vets to agree to responsibility, how will we get your idiot neighbor to pay attention?
Attrition will (unfortunately) be the only answer - but all we can do now is to ensure the health and safety of future generations of animals as the older ones pass on.
I'm not sure how you could have many more bureaucrats with their finger in the pie than there are already....but if I'm paying a registration fee for my dog and making sure my dog is spayed or neutered, you can bet I'm going to be up at arms about my neighbor who doesn't take care of the ones she has and comes dragging home more kitty machines. I do think the responsible will do the right thing - I also think the responsible are tired of being responsible for the irresponsible (what a conundrum!) - but if there are a few more bureaucrats on the rolls for a few years to get things under control, so be it.....
What will change is that Mr. Joe Irresponsible Dog Owner will no longer be allowed to go to the shelter and pick up Fido after a midnight run and have Fido returned in the same shape he was in when he left home...and that would be a GOOD thing, if Fido came home without his cajones and no longer able to reproduce a muttsky. There's where my support for mandatory S/N comes in.
i think it's a great idea. my fiancee and i were just at the local spca today and they were flooded with cats. we were able to get two cats for $100, which is half price, simply because they have too many cats.
Considering the bill has been amended (and in my opinion, weakened), here is the current proposal as of 7/3/07. I cannot for the life of me see where this is removing all pet ownership - it IS removing irresponsible pet ownership by attrition.
PETA is a strange org and is supporting this bill - and it may well be their first step toward eliminating pet ownership - but this bill is a far cry from elimination. Please read for yourself and determine whether you believe this is removing all rights from pet owners and responsible breeders. I just can't see it, but maybe I've missed something.
,,This bill would, until January 1, 2012, authorize a local
jurisdiction or its authorized local animal control agency to allow
for issuance of an intact permit for one male and one female dog per
household in order to allow the dogs to produce a single litter of
offspring, subject to specified criteria.>>
the above is the scariest part of this bill.....what happens after January 1, 2012? Why is there an end date in this legislation? No doubt in my mind that this is when PETA et al, will be back to "tighten" the bill.
And residents can be allowed only one breeding female per household? What kind of breeding program does that allow for - no one can operate that way. If your girl misses or get pyometra, are you allowed another permit? Or if you have a litter with just one puppy....too bad for you? And one cannot have multiple stud dogs in a household? Wow.
Lots of really bad stuff in here....if anyone thinks this is not geared towards eventual elimination of all breeding, you've got rose-colored glasses on.
Last edited by Toria; 07-08-2007 at 06:30 AM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Just kind of thinking "out loud" here. 
