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.
you know, i actually don't have a problem at all with RESPONSIBLE breeders..... those that test the sire and dam for potential genetic issues that the breed is prone to, those that screen the potential owner in an effort to make sure the cute little puppy doesn't wind up in a shelter when it is no longer so little and cute, those that breed to better the breed, not just to make a buck or 2 off of the current fad dog of the week or month, those that treat the sire and dam like the companion animals that dogs have been turned into by MAN, those that provide adequate and clean food, water and shelter and appropriate exercise and veterinary care.... those that provide adequate rest between breeding cycles for the females....
what i do have a problem with is breeders who just breed a female indiscriminately and repeatedly to produce as many puppies as possible before they have worn her body completely out by age 5 or 6 or so.... or that breed with no regard to genetic or temperament issues because they are going for a certain look or build or coloration (google lethal aussies, hip dysplasia, canine cardio defects), or that keep their income producers in wire cages stacked one on another so that animals bred to be companions have no idea what grass is or how to play or just relax and instead live covered in the feces and urine of the animal above them..... or that breed mutts (labradoodles, chiweenies, puggles, the list is endless and growing) and convince a gullible public that they are buying "designer dogs" ...... when the very same dogs are sitting in shelters across the country.....
i have seen breeders rescued or retired from these circumstances and worse.... and believe you me, they bear no resemblance at all to those cute little puppies and dogs you see in the pet stores or on line.....
Repped you once for your earlier post. Unfortunately, I can't do it again.
Animal shelters care for between 6-8 million dogs and cats every year in the United States, of whom approximately 3-4 million are euthanized. This overpopulation of companion animals is widely acknowledged across the country by professionals and experts in the animal welfare field.
Overpopulation is a tragedy. There are simply not enough responsible homes for all of these wonderful, innocent animals. At this point in time, it would be impossible to humanely house every unwanted animal in the United States. That being the case it is irresponsible to breed more for the retail market.
Companion animals are not comparable to chickens, cows, pigs, etc. We don't raise them for food. And before you get all bent out of shape, I don't belong to or support the rantings and actions of PETA. I don't support the HSUS. The ASPCA gets my discretionary dollars. I DO own two, pure-bred, unaltered male dogs. Both are active in the conformation ring and field trials. Both come from a long line of AKC Champions. I choose NOT to offer them for breeding purposes because there are already enough dogs who need a home.
AND I AM AN OUTSIDER WHO MOVED TO MISSOURI THREE YEARS AGO. I'M NOT GOING ANYWHERE. DEAL WITH IT.
This law would align MO law with other states' law. It is not revolutionary or particularly harsh.
The slippery slope argument is the most overused and worthless in all of politics. It's almost always a sign of someone who doesn't undestand the issue or doesn't have any decent argument on which to base their opposition.
Since this is the state forum and not the politics section I try to keep my responses civil rather than condescending. Of course, YMMV.
Yes, actually I am quite up to date on this issue and have been considering it long and hard. I still don't know which side of the fence I sit on because legislation such as this leaves too much room for unintended consequences, IMO.
I am well aware of the problem with pet overpopulation and of despicable conditions in some of Missouri's puppy mills. I'm also aware of how this kind of legislation starts out with the best of intentions for one sector and ends up setting the precident for other regulations far removed from that which was originally intended.
Sad fact is rural Missouri has some very poor and undereducated populations that survive day to day either by dog breeding or producing meth. They are the worst of the worst and yet they have families to feed. These folks couldn't make it as farmers or even as farm labor. And yet, because of their poverty and irresponsible breeding of dogs, the stage is set to punish responsible breeders and farmer/ranchers or hobby farmers alike.
So actually, the slippery slope arguement is usually presented by those who have taken the time to look at all sides of the arguement without bias and are willing to recognize both the benefits as well as the downfall of certain legislation.
Another point that has not been addressed is that the reason we have so many problems with puppy mills in Missouri is not for lack of existing legislation but for lack of enforcement. Law enforcement takes resources and those resources take money. Money most rural counties just don't have. So, even if this legislation passes, there is no reason to realistically expect that the resources to enforce it any better than the existing legislation, will be available.
I'm a small government person who wishes others would just behave responsibly so that the big government folk didn't have the excuse to pass more laws. Reality lies somewhere between our two utopian fantasies and in that reality slippery slopes abound. I believe rational people recognize this and attempt to perfect legislation rather than allowing their emotions to guide the way. Of course, YMMV.
Since this is the state forum and not the politics section I try to keep my responses civil rather than condescending. Of course, YMMV.
Yes, actually I am quite up to date on this issue and have been considering it long and hard. I still don't know which side of the fence I sit on because legislation such as this leaves too much room for unintended consequences, IMO.
I am well aware of the problem with pet overpopulation and of despicable conditions in some of Missouri's puppy mills. I'm also aware of how this kind of legislation starts out with the best of intentions for one sector and ends up setting the precident for other regulations far removed from that which was originally intended.
Sad fact is rural Missouri has some very poor and undereducated populations that survive day to day either by dog breeding or producing meth. They are the worst of the worst and yet they have families to feed. These folks couldn't make it as farmers or even as farm labor. And yet, because of their poverty and irresponsible breeding of dogs, the stage is set to punish responsible breeders and farmer/ranchers or hobby farmers alike.
So actually, the slippery slope arguement is usually presented by those who have taken the time to look at all sides of the arguement without bias and are willing to recognize both the benefits as well as the downfall of certain legislation.
Another point that has not been addressed is that the reason we have so many problems with puppy mills in Missouri is not for lack of existing legislation but for lack of enforcement. Law enforcement takes resources and those resources take money. Money most rural counties just don't have. So, even if this legislation passes, there is no reason to realistically expect that the resources to enforce it any better than the existing legislation, will be available.
I'm a small government person who wishes others would just behave responsibly so that the big government folk didn't have the excuse to pass more laws. Reality lies somewhere between our two utopian fantasies and in that reality slippery slopes abound. I believe rational people recognize this and attempt to perfect legislation rather than allowing their emotions to guide the way. Of course, YMMV.
Another point that has not been addressed is that the reason we have so many problems with puppy mills in Missouri is not for lack of existing legislation but for lack of enforcement. Law enforcement takes resources and those resources take money. Money most rural counties just don't have. So, even if this legislation passes, there is no reason to realistically expect that the resources to enforce it any better than the existing legislation, will be available.
I agree with you on this point. I think the money raised could be better spent enforcing the laws that are already intact to shut down unlicensed and incompliant breeders. However, that isn't the option presented to me at this point. I'll take what I can get for now (Prop B) and hope that it leads to further action against unethical treatment and breeding of dogs.
This law would limit the number of dogs each owner could have, although they've done this in Florida...
If you've noticed, Florida farmers can only own 20 pigs at a time, same for dogs in Missouri, 20 dogs.
Wording in the Initiative would allow the vegans to add additional laws with much less support, say....
20 cows per farmer....They did this in Florida, we've already got a law in MO protecting dogs....
Horrible wreck in economy?
really?? missouri breeders are limited to 20 dogs??
then they should be delighted with this puppy mill bill .... it limits them to FIFTY dogs......
and it is specifically targeted to commercial dog breeders.... i imagine it would require an entirely different initiative to legislate cow and pig and chicken operations.....
and i couldn't be further from vegan than the man in the moon..... its not about animal rights .... its about animal welfare .... big difference....
if you want, i can post pictures of some of the mill and backyard breeder survivors i have come in contact with .....
or you can just google "puppy mills" .... but be warned, if you have the LEAST bit of compassion for dogs or cats or other companion animals, there are some things that you just can't "unsee" ......
and mogal .... not sure how responsible breeders would be punished under this legislation?? or farmers? or hobby farmers??
We Missourian's tend to be an independent lot, and generally mistrustful of the government. And while I may disagree with some of you, I respect those of you who I may not agree with, who have apparently done your own research, and are not just repeating "what they heard".
For those still on the fence on this issue, this section of the current state law may be of help - RSMO-Chapter 273. Yes there is a lot to read, but if you would rather do your own homework on the issue, and not let others do your thinking for you, here is where you'll find the answer to most of your questions about current state law.
After reading both, I must apologize to those who are passionate on this issue from both sides, I am a little confused at what the big hub bub is all about. This law adds very little to current state law and does very little new to "insure" we help the victims of the problem - the mistreated dogs, and for 99.99% of us, means jack. Sorry I can't buy into the conspiracy theories that limiting "large dog breeders to 50 breeding animals" means pigs or cows are next.
I am also a little bewildered that the thread on the young lady that was held in sexual slavery for years in our state, doesn't seem to have incensed some of our forum readers nearly as much as the possibility of a new dog breeding law has.
really?? missouri breeders are limited to 20 dogs??
then they should be delighted with this puppy mill bill .... it limits them to FIFTY dogs......
and it is specifically targeted to commercial dog breeders.... i imagine it would require an entirely different initiative to legislate cow and pig and chicken operations.....
and i couldn't be further from vegan than the man in the moon..... its not about animal rights .... its about animal welfare .... big difference....
if you want, i can post pictures of some of the mill and backyard breeder survivors i have come in contact with .....
or you can just google "puppy mills" .... but be warned, if you have the LEAST bit of compassion for dogs or cats or other companion animals, there are some things that you just can't "unsee" ......
and mogal .... not sure how responsible breeders would be punished under this legislation?? or farmers? or hobby farmers??
Does anyone have an actual link for the BILL, not the petition?
Our teachers are preaching this to us, but I can't find anywhere to read it...
And we ALREADY have laws against puppy mills, we don't have enough, executive force, if you will, to carry them out
Statutory Amendment to Chapter 273, Relating to Dog Breeders 2010-086, Version 2
[full text]
Official ballot title certified by Secretary of State on December 28, 2009.
OFFICIAL BALLOT TITLE AS CERTIFIED BY
SECRETARY OF STATE
Shall Missouri law be amended to:
* require large-scale dog breeding operations to provide each dog under their care with sufficient food, clean water, housing and space; necessary veterinary care; regular exercise and adequate rest between breeding cycles;
* prohibit any breeder from having more than 50 breeding dogs for the purpose of selling their puppies as pets; and
* create a misdemeanor crime of “puppy mill cruelty” for any violations?
It is estimated state governmental entities will incur costs of $654,768 (on-going costs of $521,356 and one-time costs of $133,412). Some local governmental entities may experience costs related to enforcement activities and savings related to reduced animal care activities.
According to the Secretary of State's website this is how it will appear on the November ballot. Hope this helps.
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.
Dogs are not live stock
