Illinois Legislation

[Vandal]

Illinois residents are urged to act now to prevent passage of Trojan
Horse legislation -- supposedly aimed at "puppy mills" -- but that
would have the effect of wiping out most (probably nearly all)
small-scale responsible working dog, sporting dog, and home breeding
in that state.

NAIA has an action alert about HB 198, which contains a quick and easy
way for Illinois residents to send an email to their Illinois state
legislators.
<http://capwiz.com/naiatrust/issues/a...ow_alert=1>

AKC has an action alert about HB 198 here
http://www.akc.org/news/index.cfm?article_id=3710

Working dog organizations, sporting dog clubs, breed clubs, kennel
clubs, rescue groups and others who have members or a presence in
Illinois are also urged to act now.

Below I've copied an alert from the American Sport Dog Alliance about
HB 198.

Laura Sanborn

******************************

Illinois Dog Owners – Urgent Alert
Hearing Tuesday On Legislation That Will Harm Dog Hobbyists

by JOHN YATES
American Sporting Dog Alliance
http://www.americansportingdogalliance.org
asda@conline.net

This article is archived at:
<http://eaglerock814.proboards107.com/index.cgi?
action=display&board=general&thread=19>

SPRINGFIELD, IL - Illinois House Bill 198 is one of the most
repressive and malicious pieces of animal rights legislation ever
introduced in America. It takes aim at people who are hobby breeders
of purebred dogs. If enacted, it will destroy the life's work of
many of the finest breeders in America. It also will encourage the
importation of "puppy mill" dogs from other states to meet the
demand for companion animals in Illinois, and will have a major
economic impact on a state that already has been hard-hit by the
recession.

This legislation bears the clear imprint of the Humane Society of
the United States, the political arm of the radical animal rights
movement that is working toward the elimination of domestic animals
from American life.

The situation in Illinois is critical because this bill is being
pushed hard and fast in the Legislature. It was hurried through the
House Rules Committee last week, and now has been scheduled for a
hearing this coming Tuesday, February 10, before the
Business/Occupational License Committee. This hurry-up scheduling is
ominous, especially since political party leadership hasn't
announced the names of committee members for dog owners to contact.
The public hearing will be held at 10 a.m. in Room 122B of the State
Capitol.

Because of the short notice of the hearing, prompt and aggressive
action is required from all Illinois dog owners. If you do not act,
there is a strong potential for irreparable damage to be done to
everyone who owns a dog in Illinois, and to the dogs themselves.

HB 198 says that:

· Anyone who owns more than three intact females and sells
puppies would be classified as a commercial breeding kennel, subject
to high fees for licensure, rigorous inspections, the forfeiture of
several constitutional protections, mandatory fingerprinting and
criminal background checks by the state police and Federal Bureau of
Investigation, forfeiture of the right to redress in a court of law,
heavy loads of paperwork, unworkable standards of care, and the
forcible invasion of personal and financial records.

· In addition, no one would be permitted to keep or own more
than 20 dogs that are not spayed or neutered. No dog could be bred
unless it is examined by a veterinarian. Also, people would not be
able to raise a litter of puppies inside their home if other adult
dogs are present. It would be illegal to keep more than three dogs
together, which would apply to the number of dogs kept inside a
home, ban the common practice of kenneling a pack of hounds together
and eliminate large fenced lots to allow young dogs to get plenty of
exercise.

· There also is an ambiguous provision that requires the state
to pass judgment on the "qualifications" of a kennel license
applicant before issuing a license. This would be an entirely
subjective judgment by the kennel inspector, as the legislation does
not define adequate qualifications.

· Only veterinarians could euthanize a dog, which causes
terrible suffering and agony if a veterinarian cannot be located
quickly.

· Dog owners also could face heavy fines and loss of licenses
for irrelevant violations, such as surface rust on wires, a few
cobwebs, a knocked over water bowl or chipped paint. Temperature
requirements would make it impossible for people to acclimate
hunting, herding and performance dogs to weather conditions, thus
creating danger for the dogs. Fines and civil penalties would
multiply exponentially, and even minor offenses would have the
potential to destroy a dog owner financially and cause the loss of
her or his home and lifetime savings.

· The legislation also contains numerous powers to seize dogs,
or to require their owners to turn them over to an animal shelter
within seven days of license revocation, or if a dog owner is
incorrectly licensed.

The bill's formal name is the Dog Breeders License Act. HSUS and
other animal rights groups are nicknaming it "Chloe's Bill," for a
dog allegedly rescued from an Illinois "puppy mill." It is sponsored
by State Rep. John A. Fritchey (D-Chicago). Its Senate counterpart,
SB 53, is sponsored by Sen. Dan Kotowski (D- Mt. Prospect). Joint
introduction is another sign that this bill is being pushed hard and
fast.

Here is a link to the actual legislation:
<http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/fulltext.asp?
DocName=&SessionId=76&GA=96&DocTypeId=HB&DocNum=19 8&GAID=10&LegID=402
20&SpecSess=&Session=>

The American Sporting Dog Alliance urges Illinois dog owners to
immediately:

· Contact members of this committee before Tuesday to express
opposition to HB 198 and state your reasons why. Contact information
for the Business/Occupational Licenses Committee Democrats is given
below. The names of Republican members have not been released. It
cannot be emphasized enough that this is crucial! We urge every dog
owner to send an email immediately, and follow this up with a phone
call, fax or letter by surface mail.

· Because the Republican Party leadership has not announced
the names of representatives assigned to the Business/Occupational
Licenses Committee, please contact Republican Party leaders in the
state House by fax and ask them to forward your letters to committee
members. Rep. Tom Cross is the Republican leader
(http://www.ilga.gov/house/Rep.asp?GA=96&MemberID=1368 ) and Rep.
JoAnn Osmond is Republican Caucus Chairman
(http://www.ilga.gov/house/Rep.asp?GA=96&MemberID=1461 ).

· Contact your own senator and representative to voice
opposition to HB 198 and SB 53. Here is a link to contact
information for each representative
(http://www.ilga.gov/house/default.asp) and for each senator
(http://www.ilga.gov/senate/default.asp ).

· Sign our online petition, which will be delivered to members
of the committee at the hearing. Here is the petition for Illinois
residents: http://www.petitiononline.com/asda1/petition.html. Here
is the petition for residents of other states:
http://www.petitiononline.com/asda2/petition.html.

· And, very importantly, attend the hearing if at all possible
and make your position known.

We understand that we are asking a lot of dog owners, but believe
that these requests are both urgent and necessary in order to
protect the rights of Illinois dog owners.

Illinois dog owners have received support from the Illinois State
Veterinary Medical Association, which has come out in strong
opposition to the legislation. Once again the ISVMA is to be
congratulated for its courage and commitment to the welfare of dogs.
It is telling that the ISVMA labels this bill the "HSUS Dog Breeder
License Act."

Dog owners also have found a perhaps unlikely ally – the Illinois
Department of Financial and Professional Regulation, which would be
the state agency assigned to regulate dog breeders. The agency is
opposing the bill because it doesn't consider dog breeding a
professional occupation, as defined by its legislative mandate.

Here is a list of Democratic Party members of the
Business/Occupational Licenses Committee (Republicans have not been
assigned yet) and their contact information:

Chairman - Representative Robert Rita (D-28)
(217) 558-1000 / (217) 558-1091 FAX - robertbobrita@aol.com
Also, please ask Rep. Rita to pass along your letter to Republicans
on the committee.

Vice Chairman - Representative John A. Fritchey (D-11)
(217) 782-2458 / (217) 557-7214 FAX – email not available.
Rep. Fritchey also is the sponsor of the bill. Letters sent to him
by constituents are being answered by HSUS.

Rep. Edward J. Acevedo (D-2)
(217) 782-2855 / (217) 557-5148 FAX - Sylvia_idrovo@sbcglobal.net

Rep. Daniel V. Beiser (D-11)
(217) 782-5996 / (217) 558-0493 FAX - dvbeiser@sbcglobal.net

Rep. Daniel J. Burke (D-23)
(217) 782-1117 / (217) 782-0927 FAX - burkedj2@ilga.gov

Rep. Thomas Holbrook (D-113)
(217) 782-0104 / (217) 782-1333 FAX - holbrookta@ilga.gov

Rep. David E. Miller (D-29)
(217) 782-8087 / (217) 558-6433 FAX - repdavidmiller@aol.com

Rep. George Scully Jr. (D-80)
(217) 782-1719 - District office fax (708) 672-0700 -
Smangiaracina@hds.ilga.gov

Rep. Luis Arroyo (D-3)
(217) 782-0480 / (217) 557-9609 FAX – Email not available
Rep. Arroyo withdrew his name from the list of cosponsors of HB 198.
Please thank him.

HSUS has focused many of its resources on Illinois, and recently
named a new State Director, attorney Jordan Matyas. We have received
confirmed reports that Rep. Fritchey is sending correspondence about
this bill directly to Matyas, and the replies to constituents are
coming directly from HSUS.

Propaganda for the bill makes it sound like legislation to stop
poorly operated commercial kennels, which have been dubbed "puppy
mills" by HSUS. However, the bill actually targets small scale hobby
breeders of purebred dogs. Large commercial kennels already are
regulated by the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the State of
Illinois, and all kennels are under the jurisdiction of state animal
cruelty laws.

Matyas and his cronies also continue to spread their agenda of
canine destruction in neighboring Wisconsin and Indiana, which are
expected to see similar legislation very soon, and in the City of
Chicago.

The American Sporting Dog Alliance represents owners, breeders and
professionals who work with breeds of dogs that are used for
hunting. We also welcome people who work with other breeds, as
legislative issues affect all of us. We are a grassroots movement
working to protect the rights of dog owners, and to assure that the
traditional relationships between dogs and humans maintains its
rightful place in American society and life.

The American Sporting Dog Alliance also needs your help so that we
can continue to work to protect the rights of dog owners. Your
membership, participation and support are truly essential to the
success of our mission. We are funded solely by your donations in
order to maintain strict independence.

Please visit us on the web at
http://www.americansportingdogalliance.org . Our email is
asda@csonline.net .

PLEASE CROSS-POST AND FORWARD THIS REPORT TO YOUR FRIENDS

[marosmith]

Just ask Barak Obama to help (write him a letter, or act like a homeless person at one of his town hall meetings and maybe he will call on you for a question...), I am sure he can convince his liberal friends to stop this nonsense! (sarcasm)

[gslore]

There has got to be a way to put puppy mills and backyard breeders out of business, without hurting legitimate breeders that are improving the breed.

I don't know what that fine line is, but IMHO, the same slippery slope argument is always used which prevents any changes from occurring.

I do wish the AKC upheld the stringent standards of the SV. Both parents must be breed surveyed and recommended for breeding before the offspring can be SV registered. Maybe that would put a dent in the pockets of irresponsible breeders?

Wish I had the answer.

[lcht2]

if you ask me i think you should have a license to breed...hey lets see if we cant get a new law passed shall we?? haha

seriously, ordinary folks can recommend new laws

[selzer]

The problem is that if you want the AKC to set the standard of what constitutes breedworthy, then working line breeders, and possibly German Showline breeders would not be able to register their dogs through the AKC.

At the same time, the temperament tests and AKC titles have been criticized for not being a sound measure of temperament, allowing dogs with weak nerves to pass. Certainly a CD or even a UD does not provide any assurance that the dog in question has the stamina and temperament to perform the job it was bred for. That is not what the obedience program is set up to do.

The AKC is responsible for more than 100 breeds. I think that it would be better if you had three separate German Shepherd clubs with standards that would give your dog or bitch the ok for their line. Breeding one line to another would not necessarily be frowned upon, but their offspring, while still eligible to be AKC, might not pass for example the Working German Shepherd Dog standard, if a promising pup out of that litter was bred back to a Working line dog, pups out of this litter might pass the working line standard breed survey.

I think it is important to allow the bringing in of dogs from the different lines to improve certain traits, rather than simply branching out and never mixing the lines. I think we are asking too much from the AKC though. I think the GSDCA or a German Shepherd Working Dog Club could make better decisions than the AKC on our dogs.

[selzer]

You can slap 50 bucks down in my county and you have a license to breed.

Are you are suggesting that you should pass a test to breed, or meet certain standards to breed, or each dog should be licensed to breed by passing a series of tests?

The big question is, who creates the test? At what point would the tests start favoring showline dogs? At what point would other lines be disallowed?

You cannot create a meaningful license without considering the structure and temperament of the dogs. And yet, if you do consider the structure and temperament, at some point you will be disenfranchising many GSD fanciers.

Legislators are not put in office for their knowledge of dogs, much less for their knowledge of our breed, and their knowledge of breeding. Asking them to make laws about this is really asking for a real problem. It is like asking the postal service to create laws to regulate pharmaceudicals. The postal service could probably introduce some good stuff, but mostly they would fall way short becuase they do not have a clue.

[lcht2]

Originally Posted By: selzer

Are you are suggesting that you should pass a test to breed, or meet certain standards to breed, or each dog should be licensed to breed by passing a series of tests?

yup, none of that "my dog is breedworthy because its purebread" crap. the real deal. the dog meets the standards of its breed.

[lcht2]

Originally Posted By: selzer
You cannot create a meaningful license without considering the structure and temperament of the dogs. And yet, if you do consider the structure and temperament, at some point you will be disenfranchising many GSD fanciers.

but wouldnt that be a good thing?? i mean, you cut back on the breeding which cuts back on the popularity meaning the dogs are better bread. in my opinion if a dog, not just the GSD, cant do what it was bread to do, for instance, some dogs were originally bread to work, then they can not be bread. if they cant do it then they cant breed. just like in europe, im thinking this is right, you cant breed a GSD if it does not have a SchH title. SchH was originally desinged to test the dogs abilities to its standard. obviously if the dog can not pass the test, i.e. be titled, then you do not have the rights to breed. that saying the dog is without health issues.

[selzer]

The problem is that if they made this legislation right now, it would probably be the working line GSDs that would be out in the cold. AKC showline GSDs would be the only ones that would pass a breed survey. The breed survey will not stop substandard dogs from breeding. It might make dogs start to conform more to someone's interpretation of the standard, but it would not keep unstable dogs from being bred.

Schutzhund is a working dog title. It tests for obedience, tracking, and protection. I am not 100% sure if protection part is included in the SchH1 title. It does not test German Shepherds for what the dogs are bred to do. Sorry. German Shepherds were bred to herd sheep. There is no herding test in the Schutzhund training.

I do not know what all of Europe does. In order to be registrated with the SV, the dog must pass a breed survey, Koerkerclasse (sp?), and endurance test, Schutzhund title, hip scores, and the actual mating has to be approved. If you read these breed surveys, they are very descriptive of the strengths and weaknesses of the dogs. I do not know if when push comes to shove, if you have a kkl1 dog and put through an application to breed to a KKL1 bitch if it is simply accepted, or if someone calls up the breed surveys of each and actually reads through and gives their blessing.

The last organization I would want making breeding decisions would the federal or state governments.

Next would be the AKC, sorry but they have too many breeds to consider and conformation is where they get their money which means that breeding would be seriously in favor of showline breeders.

Even the German Shepherd Dog Club of America would not necessarily give the working line owners the go ahead when it comes to breeding. Some show dogs get titles, obedience titles, etc. Dallas had a herding title. But the vast majority of show dogs have no titles whatsoever.

[Timber1]

You forgot to tell us what the standards are. Is it the smaller European GSD working lines, be it the UK, Belgium or Germany, the American lines, or the show dogs. Or the big US guys, breed exclusively because of size.