German Shepherds Forum banner

1 - 10 of 10 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
31,877 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
in.

If you are from Ohio, or if you are a breeder or are interested in fair legislation, please send our congressmen your dissention of this bill.

Every state that passes bad dog-legislation makes it easier for other states to do likewise.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,250 Posts
Am I being incredibly thickheaded this morning? What am I missing? This is what I've been able to find about these bills so far. And, so far, it doesn't sound bad to me.

Sen. Cates (left) joined Rep. Hughes at a press conference this morning to announce the introduction of SB 173 and HB 223. COLUMBUS—Seeking to protect Ohio’s dogs from horrible abuse at the hands of irresponsible breeders who operate puppy mills, State Senator Gary Cates, along with State Representative Jim Hughes (R-Clintonville) and State Representative Robert Hagan (D-Youngstown), today unveiled legislation, Senate Bill 173 and House Bill 223, that will adopt safeguards and enforcement procedures to ensure dogs used primarily for breeding purposes are not mistreated.

Sen. Cates and Rep. Hughes held a Statehouse press conference today to discuss their bills, which would require the Ohio Department of Agriculture to create a state level commercial dog kennel control authority, responsible for licensing kennels and setting a standard of care for these dogs, as well as inspecting and enforcing the laws and rules regarding the standard of care in commercial kennels around the state.

Cates explained that these mass-breeding facilities provide minimal or no veterinary care for their dogs. Not to mention, they are left in overcrowded, filthy cages and are forced to breed until they are too old or too ill. “After rescuing my own dog, Pretty Girl, from a puppy mill, I saw firsthand the horrible conditions these dogs are forced to live in,” Cates said. “While Ohio already has animal cruelty laws in place, there are very few people to enforce them, leaving the door open for puppy mill operators to continue neglecting and harming these dogs. It is my hope that this bill will protect other dogs like Pretty Girl who must wait for a loving family to come rescue them.”

The bill will also set some standards for kennels, including the size and conditions of the cages in which the dogs are kept. In addition, the proposal creates guidelines for socializing, providing veterinary care and proper grooming of dogs being kept at licensed commercial kennels that house 9 or more dogs.

“Puppy mills often possess unsafe and unsanitary conditions, putting the dogs and their puppies at risk,” Hughes said. “This legislation will help protect a! nimals f rom abuse and ensure that breeders are caring for their dogs in a responsible manner.”

“There are some bad actors in the dog-breeding business. This legislation will crack down on irresponsible breeders that treat their animals as a simple means to an end. Like everyone else, I am absolutely sickened when I see news reports detailing the despicable and wretched conditions “puppy-mill” dogs are forced to exist in,” said Hagan. “Hopefully, the threat of substantial fines and a jail time will drive these bad actors out of the dog-breeding business.”

For more information please contact Andy Shifflette in Sen. Cates’ Office at (614) 466-8072, Sarah Williams in Rep. Hughes’ Office at (614) 466-2473, or Gregg Paul in Rep. Hagan’s Office at (614) 466-9435.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,649 Posts
Re: HB223 and SB173 Ohio they are trying to sneak

Sounds good to me too. I believe that some breeders object to any legislation against breeding because they feel it will potentially infringe on their rights.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
31,877 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
Re: HB223 and SB173 Ohio they are trying to sneak

Not completely, there is more. You will have to be bonded which means pay out a certain amount of money so that IF the state decides to come and "rescue" your dogs from you, then this money will be sitting there for them to provide for thier care.

Here is what I object to about that:
1. I do not like the idea of everyone paying IN CASE they decide to break a law someday.

2. If the shelters realize that there are a bunch of paying customers out there just for the asking, they may be more liberal about what they constitute neglect and abuse.

Maybe people believe that there is no way that a shelter might STEAL a decent breeders dogs. But I am not convinced.

This allows AC or the humane society to deputize anyone in order to come in and check out your place. No way. I imagine half of those people will be animal rights nuts, who will see a crate and cry foul!

Currently in Ohio, if your dogs are licensed, they cannot come in and take them without a warrant. That is the way it should be in my opinion.

Currently in many parts of Ohio, they do not enforce the cruelty laws on the books. This is a way to up the ante and collect more money from paying customers. I will have to pay $150 for a kennel license (<9 breeding dogs) plus $80 for individual licenses. If it stands $230, instead of the $50 I currently pay. Yes, IT IS a big deal.

Here is where some of you rescue people come in, because eight breeding dogs are it, right, before you have to pay even more and be subject to even more scrutiny and purchase bonds like a criminal and be fingerprinted like a criminal. Hitler did not just start killing people one day. He started by registering and restricting and changing the public's attitude about them. I have never been finger printed in my life, and I see no reason to start now.

But back to dogs, yes to stay within that magic eight number, what might people do? Drop their dead weight off at shelters instead of keeping them.

Because a thirteen year old intact bitch who has had 1 litter eight years ago will be considered a breeding animal.

Make the people who are guilty of cruelty, abandoning their animals, neglecting their animals pay for shelters and Animal Control.

They are just trying to weedle more money out of the people who pay. The people who never have, never will. And they will still never do anything about it.

This bill has been around for a while and it is not nice to breeders at all. It allows them to sieze your animals without a warrant. Kind of like they did to that guy where they kicked his window in and took all of his dogs because his litter of pups (which they should not have counted) put him over the allowable number of dogs.

If you refuse to let them in for ANY reason, they can come and take all of your dogs.

I am sorry, but if I have a new litter of puppies, I do not want people that are around a lot of dogs, many of them sick, to be walking around my yards and kennels.

These people do not need ANY training. They can walk in to your kennel and see a pile of poo and say, ewww, unsanitary conditions. They can see no food dishes because you put it down and pick it up, and say we have to get these dogs out of here. They can look at your dog's conditions, see or feel a rib or two and because your dog is NOT fat, they can say "undernourished."

What they are NOT going to do is stop breeders from dumping their used up animals at shelters.

What they are NOT going to do is ANYTHING about people who let their mutts get pregnant time and time again, leaving the pups to get slaughtered in the road.

What they are NOT going to do is to stop the IDIOTS (who are not breeders and the cause of all the problems) from dropping their dogs in shelters just because the dog is inconvenient.

What it is NOT going to dog is to make the freeloaders license their dogs.

I will not support any piece of dog-legislation that doesn't say that they WILL go after anyone who owns or harbors a dog without a current license. They should not have laws they do not intend to enforce.

There is another sticky little part of this: They do not have to issue a kennel license to anyone they BELIEVE will not follow all of the ordinances. So I may have eight dogs and require a kennel license, and they might DECIDE for whatever reason (lives in a trailer, single income, raises GSDs) that I MIGHT not follow all the ordinances and refuse my kennel license. Then if I don't have any litters, I lose my business, if I do, they will never approve my Kennel license again. I do not have a problem with them refusing a license to someone CONVICTED of cruelty or neglect, but I believe that WE are SUPPOSED to be INNOCENT until Proven guilty. Not the other way around.

Like so many other dog-laws, it is created by people who do not know enough about it, and it is a bad law.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,250 Posts
Re: HB223 and SB173 Ohio they are trying to sneak

Thank you for taking the time to explain all that, selzer!
It didn't make much sense that someone would object to that, so I sort of figured I was missing something, or there had to be more to it.

Seeing what else is buried in there, I can certainly understand your objections and your concerns. Once again, it seems like the only people who stand to be hurt by this are the ones who are already playing by the rules.
I guess some things will never change. We pass new law after new law after new law instead of just enforcing the ones we already have on the books. I understand that Ohio has some of the weakest animal cruelty laws in the country, but I'm thinking that there has to be plenty of laws (or enough wiggle-room within the laws) for them to go after and shut down the true puppy mills if they really wanted to bother. I think you're probably right and it comes down to a good way for them to take more money from law-abiding people.

Do you know when this is supposed to come up for a vote?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
31,877 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
Re: HB223 and SB173 Ohio they are trying to sneak

I think they were having hearings on it this past week.
I am not sure how they came out.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
671 Posts
Re: HB223 and SB173 Ohio they are trying to sneak

having some first hand knowledge of the puppy mill business in Mo. I gotta say I hope it passes. Would love to have something like that go thru here! A pity it will cost a legitmate breeder more but you are running a business and businesses are regulated by local and state govt.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,796 Posts
Re: HB223 and SB173 Ohio they are trying to sneak

There's a difference between a hobby and a business and I disagree that all legitimate hobby breeders fall under the umbrella of running a business enterprise. In fact, most of the hobby breeders I know lose money, they're lucky to break even.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,389 Posts
Re: HB223 and SB173 Ohio they are trying to sneak

I'm sure that Mr. Attleson, in Littleton, CO, never thought that Animal Control would take his dogs away. But they waited until they knew nobody was home and got an emergency warrant.

I don't know if this story was posted on this forum, or not.
http://www.animalcontrolwatch.com/colorado-city-of-littleton-seizes-dogs-from-english-setter-rescue

On the UKC website with more detail. (the actually story starts a few paragraphs down.)
http://www.ukcdogs.com/WebSite.nsf/Articles/LegislativeUpdate04162008
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
31,877 Posts
Discussion Starter #10
Re: HB223 and SB173 Ohio they are trying to sneak

Yes, and while he did get his dogs back he had to pay $1000 in fines for an overnight stay at the shelter and attourney's fees.

This legislation is not going to stop puppy mills and it will not stop mutts from breeding indiscriminately. In fact, the only people that it will hamper are the responsible breeders. The people that have a couple of pure-bred dogs and throw them together to make puppies to sell -- it won't bother them. The people that have a couple of pure-bred dogs of different breeds and throw them together to make doodles or poo's it will not bother them either.

It will only bother the people who are seriously into dogs, have a kennel of animals, some of which are retired, some of which have been rescued. People who work with their dogs, train them, title them, breed them, show them, vet them, license them.

And somebody WANTS this to go through -- that is because they do not see it from the breeder's perspective. Like the legislators, that really do not know anything about being in the dog fancy, whether it be showing or working or performance.

In order not to sound like a broken record, I will shut up now.

The thing is we want dogs from established breeders, breeders who show, or trial their dogs. There will be fewer of these around if this legislation goes through and expect the costs of a well-bred shepherd from a reputable breeder to skyrocket.
 
1 - 10 of 10 Posts
Top