German Shepherds Forum banner

1 - 20 of 37 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,505 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
The "you know who" has come to Missouri. They paid to bring in out of state people to canvas the state for signatures. I hate it that Missouri is so infamous for the puppy mills. This makes it a perfect place for AR extremists to get a foothold in the law and legislature. Who would vote FOR puppy cruelty?

Arrrrgh. Wayne P. has been in several cities. This is not an effort by Missourians for Missouri animals but rather an effort but a large organization from the outside.

seMissourian.com: Op/Ed Column: Proposition B opposition (10/04/10)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,389 Posts
The language of "Prop B" is not posted, or I missed it. But the goal of PETA and HSUS is to totally eliminate dogs and cats as pets, among other things.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,505 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
Yes, they want to get rid of all licensed breeders and may be successful if this passes.

Then the bill is a law and can be expanded by amendment to all other breeding endeavors. My own city just recently toyed with idea that anyone who breeds a litter in the city limits must be inspected and registered as a breeder and meet breeder housing requirements. Wow.

The Truth about Prop B - Alliance for Truth
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,389 Posts
Yes, they try to pass something to get a foot in the door, so to say. Then later they can make changes to it to make things worse.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
671 Posts
no they dont want to elimate all breeders. Not the ones who get proper vet care for their dogs, not the ones who allow their dogs access to the outdoors, not the ones who give their dogs enough room in their crates to actually stand up and turn around, not the ones who let their females recover before breeding them again, and on and on. A breeder who cares for their animals is already doing most everything the bill mentions. What we do want to eliminate are the ones like the guys in Tuscumbia with the 100+ dogs living in absolute horror. That is what we would like to eliminate. And if you have less then 9 breeders why you can do just about anything you darn well please to those little lives even under these new laws.
By the way I am not PETA or any other group. Just a Missourian who would like our state to NOT be known as a puppy mill haven.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
671 Posts
I would urge each of you to read the bill, really read it and then tell me what you would want done differently if it was YOUR dog. The language of the bill is not radical and all the fear mongering that we are hearing is just that. Really it isn't a bad thing. Lots of Mo Vets are behind this bill as are many (maybe ALL) rescue groups. Giving a dog a kennel that is large enough for him to lie down in and stretch his legs is hardly extremist. This is a pretty conservative state and the bill may not pass. and that would be very sad for a lot of lives.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
32,033 Posts
Large scale is eleven females??? Owning eleven females does not equal breeding eleven females.

Whatever.
 

·
"I like Daffy" Moderator
Joined
·
3,276 Posts
(4) ”Sufficient housing, including protection from the elements” means constant and unfettered access to an indoor enclosure that has a solid floor; is not stacked or otherwise placed on top of or below another animal’s enclosure; is cleaned of waste at least once a day while the dog is outside the enclosure; and does not fall below 45 degrees Fahrenheit, or rise above 85 degrees Fahrenheit.
This means that breeders will have to provide a kennel building for their dogs -- a dog house will not be considered adequate shelter under this provision.

(6) ”Regular exercise” means constant and unfettered access to an outdoor exercise area that is composed of a solid, ground level surface with adequate drainage; provides some protection against sun, wind, rain, and snow; and provides each dog at least twice the square footage of the indoor floor space provided to that dog.
We are back to the kennel building again with indoor/outdoor capabilities. Dogs could not be kept in the home as they would not have "regular exercise" as required in the bill.

Other parts of the bill require that crates not be stacked. I understand the feeling that it is important from the pictures used in the ads as support (by the way, the HSUS is paying for those ads), but I have friends that breed Schipperkes. It is hard to bend over to open crates that are on the floor -- so having all of them on the floor would be difficult.

My German Shepherds are in big crates -- 26 x 42 x 34, but they would not be big enough according to the bill. Just something to think about.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,505 Posts
Discussion Starter #10 (Edited)
The dogs will also have to have constant access to the outdoors. How many of us provide that? Newly whelped pups able to get outside in the winter.

I am not for puppy mills. I do believe this bill is just a foot in the door to stop most breeding. Unfortunately, what looks good on the surface gets public support especially in the cities. They use the horror of some puppy breeder situations to advance a larger agenda.

We have very adequate animal cruelty laws on the books here. More legislation is not needed at all to protect animals. The problems come from other sources. Unfortunately, if one is not aware of who and what is behind the bill, it reads fine on the surface. All of the vets in my area are against the legislation.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
21,368 Posts
Instead of a "bill",,which I don't agree with, and if this is aimed at the puppy mills in MO, why not AIM it at those puppy mills? Go in, inspect and shut em down??

I am also not for puppy mills, but this seems to be targeting "non puppy millers" as well.

I could not give my dogs constant access to outside because they are IN my house and there's no way I would build a kennel building , leave them in it, especially while I'm not home..

Glad I don't live in MO.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,505 Posts
Discussion Starter #12
Because of the puppy mill notoriety here we are a target where it might be possible to get legislation in with a broad reaching goal. Once passed, it is easier to amend and attach to existing law. Certainly this was driven by an outside, large organization which brought in outside money and persons to push their agenda. We are one of the places where they are trying to make an inroad and begin nation wide efforts. For sure, it is not about living in MO particularly.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,447 Posts
Oh exactly. It looks good because it is proposed as the "puppy mill" and animal "cruelty" act/law. The problem is that that is not what it is about. HSUS is trying to get their foot in the door to stop all breeding and owning of domestic animals. Dogs, cats, horses, pigs, cows, you name it. They define a pet as living on the owners property, basically. Where does that leave farmers? This is not about puppy mills.

I'm obviously against puppy mills, but this new proposed bill is not the way to stop them. The laws in place are more than sufficient to go after puppy millers. The problem is they don't have the man power to enforce them with inspections and housing facilities when they do shut them down.

The new bill will effectively shut down almost all show kennels too. This isn't about puppy mills. It is about getting a foot in the door to place laws to basically legally stop owning pets!

If you're in Missouri, VOTE NO on Prop B November 2!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,132 Posts
It's easier to pass a bill that makes it look like you're doing something than it is to actually do something.

And next election season, who wants to be the the guy whose opponents can say, "John Smith opposed the anti-puppy cruelty bill. John Smith voted in favor of cruelty to puppies."
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
58 Posts
Thank you for posting this!! I would have voted yes, because I thought this bill was doing something it's not. Now that I have done some research I know this bill will not only effect ALL breeders but our farmers also.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,649 Posts
Where can we find the text of the actual bill? I would decide to vote Yes or No based on that, not based on people's opinions on this forum.

As far as I can tell this is some heavy handed propaganda (and money!) coming from both the supporters and the opposition. I would put my money on the truth about the bill lying somewhere in between the claims on either side.

And btw, I would never trust an organization calling themselves "The Alliance for Truth." If that doesn't scream propaganda, I don't know what does. Check out their funding sources and you'll see it's coming from big ag (large scale agricultural organizations)...you know the people who most recently brought you salmonella in chicken eggs? Yeah, those folks.

So do thorough research of your own before you believe anyone else's representation of a particular bill (or candidate).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
58 Posts
Okay so after a ton of research I ran across this site. I am blown away by what it has to say! I am so mad that they are using the poor mistreated dogs for their hidden agenda! We don't need anymore laws we have them already, we need funding for more jobs to help enforce the laws that we already have!!

Humane Society of the United States: Funding sources, staff profiles, and political agenda

ETA: Read the whole thing I just tried to skim through it the first time but I was amazed at the info I missed doing that.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
263 Posts
I do not live in MO but in Oklahoma the laws aren't the problem. The problem is that they have too few inspectors for the number of kennels. The kennels do not get the inspections or the attention they need to enforce the law.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,649 Posts
Okay so after a ton of research I ran across this site. I am blown away by what it has to say! I am so mad that they are using the poor mistreated dogs for their hidden agenda! We don't need anymore laws we have them already, we need funding for more jobs to help enforce the laws that we already have!!

Humane Society of the United States: Funding sources, staff profiles, and political agenda

ETA: Read the whole thing I just tried to skim through it the first time but I was amazed at the info I missed doing that.
Keep doing your research. Here's the source of the information above:

Center for Consumer Freedom - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Center for Consumer Freedom or Deception? You Decide.

Center for Consumer Freedom - SourceWatch

The person who runs that website is a HIGHLY PAID lobbyist. His organization started with a big chunk of cash from Philip Morris. They also oppose Mothers Against Drunk Driving, among other innocuous and super legit non-profits. So basically the info he provides about the HSUS can also be applied to his own organization.
 
1 - 20 of 37 Posts
Top