German Shepherds Forum banner

1 - 7 of 7 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
355 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
>
> This is really not good, please read
>
> Pennsylvania Legislations Fine Print
> Targets Everyone Who Owns A Dog
>
> Committee Hearing Scheduled For Thursday, June 12
>
> by JOHN YATES
> American Sporting Dog Alliance
> http://www.americansportingdogalliance.org
> <http://www.americansportingdogalliance.org>
> [email protected] <mailto:asda%40csonline.net>
>
> HARRISBURG, PA  Legislation targeting kennels and more than a
> million individual dog owners in Pennsylvania faces a public
> hearing this coming Thursday before the state House Agriculture
> and Rural Affairs Committee. The June 12 hearing is scheduled for
> 10 a.m. in Room 140 at the Main Capitol Building.
>
> Todays report will focus on how the legislation affects all dog
> owners in Pennsylvania, even people who own only one dog. The
> legislation also paves the way for defacto spay and neuter
> mandates and tethering bans without legislative oversight and
> accountability, and casts a wide ranging electronic net over every
> dog owner to enforce proposed and current laws about tail docking,
> ear cropping, rabies vaccinations and other issues.
>
> A follow-up report will discuss the legislations impact on the
> states 2,700 licensed kennels.
>
> The American Sporting Dog Alliance urges all Pennsylvania dog
> owners to contact members of the committee to ask for changes in
> this broad-reaching legislation. If several significant changes
> are not made, the legislation should be rejected in its entirety.
>
> Rep. James Casorio (D- Westmoreland County) is the prime sponsor
> of the legislation (H.B. 2525) , which actually comes from Gov. Ed
> Rendell as the centerpiece of his vowed crackdown on alleged
> puppy mills in Pennsylvania. But the legislation is a classic
> shell game: With public attention focused on kennels, people have
> failed to notice the legislations impact on individual dog
> owners. An analysis of the legislation by The American Sporting
> Dog Alliance reveals a profound impact on all dog owners.
>
> Regulations for commercial kennels (puppy mills) actually are
> only a small part of the legislation. The rest of the legislation
> will affect individual dog owners and private kennel owners with
> much more stringent and invasive provisions, and grant the Bureau
> of Dog Law Enforcement virtually unlimited power to write new
> regulations with little or no public oversight.
>
> The American Sporting Dog Alliance strongly supports the parts of
> the legislation dealing with improving standards for commercial
> kennels. If anything, we would suggest even more stringent
> standards than are called for in the legislation.
>
> However, much of the legislation goes far beyond its promise to
> improve life for dogs in puppy mills, and has the strong
> potential to expose every dog owner in the state to unfair and
> devastating rules designed and implemented unilaterally by the
> Bureau of Dog Law Enforcement.
>
> We cannot allow ourselves to forget that several recent draft
> versions of proposed regulations were a nightmare for dog owners
> that would have forced many people to give up their pets and
> driven most of the states kennels out of business. While these
> proposed regulations have been scrapped for the political
> expediency of passing this legislation with minimal controversy in
> an election year, we frankly do not trust the Bureau with a blank
> check to write regulations at a future date without public and
> legislative oversight. The Casorio bill gives this power to the
> Bureau.
>
> Here is what this power means to dog owners.
>
> The relationship between legislation and regulations is confusing
> to many people. Legislation becomes the law, and the law
> authorizes the state bureaucracy to develop regulations (which are
> rules) to actually implement the law. Dog regulations now are
> subject to publication in The Pennsylvania Bulletin, a formal
> period to seek public comments, approval by the Legislatures
> Independent Regulatory Review Committee, and review by the House
> and Senate Agriculture committees.
>
> The Casorio legislation would scrap those protections by removing
> requirements for public notice and a hearing that are contained in
> the current law. We cannot accept this kind of blank check for the
> Bureau to do whatever it wishes in the future.
>
> From the point of view of anyone who owns even one dog, there are
> several other major problems with the Casorio/Rendell legislation,
> including:
>
>
> The homes, property and businesses of everyone who owns even one
> dog are defined as an establishment, as are every person in the
> household. The legislation gives state dog wardens unlimited power
> to enter any dog owners property and home to search, examine any
> dog for any reason, and examine personal or business records
> without a search warrant. Thus provision violates the privacy of
> more than one million Pennsylvania dog owners, as well as trashes
> constitutional protections.
>
>
> While counties will continue to issue individual dog licenses, the
> legislation requires them to send an electronic database to the
> Bureau listing everyone who buys a dog license, as well as
> complete information about the licensed dog. The Bureau also would
> be notified if anyone bounces a check for a dog license. This
> provision invades the privacy of everyone who owns a dog and
> subjects dog owners to targeted enforcement and home searches.
> Pending legislation would target people who own dogs that have
> docked tails or cropped ears, and this database would allow the
> Bureau to locate and file animal cruelty charges (a serious crime)
> for anyone who is unable to provide proof that the work was done
> by a veterinarian. Few owners of dogs are able to provide written
> proof, even though a veterinarian probably docked their dogs tail
> or cropped its ears.
>
>
> The legislation also gives the Bureau the authority to impose a
> defacto spay and neuter mandate. Current law sets license fees for
> intact dogs at $5, with lesser fees permissible for dogs that are
> spayed or neutered. The Casorio legislation removes the $5 fee and
> gives the Bureau a blank check to set whatever new fees it chooses
> by regulation, with no public or legislative oversight. In many
> states, license fees for dogs that are not spayed or neutered at
> set at $200 to $300 per year per dog. This is seen as a way to use
> annual license fees as a weapon to force dog owners to sterilize
> their pets, and the Casorio bill paves the way for this to happen
> here by Bureau edict, with no legislative accountability or
> oversight. The Casorio legislation requires counties to turn over
> spay and neuter information to the Bureau, along with verification
> of veterinary proof. We strongly oppose giving this kind of
> power to the Bureau.
>
>
> The current fine for failing to license a dog is $25. The
> legislation would increase this to a fine ranging from $50 to
> $300. These fines also would be imposed for people who fail to
> report a change of address, or who put down incorrect information
> on a dog license application.
>
>
> Dog day care providers are defined as boarding kennels, which is
> not a bad thing at face value. However, the legislation counts
> every day that a dog is in day care as a separate dog. If a dog is
> in day care for five days, it becomes five different dogs on
> paper. If one dog is in day care when its owner is at work, it
> suddenly becomes 260 different dogs over the course of a
> year! This means that anyone who provides day care or dog
> sitting services will have to pay very high license fees, as if
> they own a very large kennel. A teen-ager who gets paid $5 a day
> to watch a dog when its owner is at work, suddenly could face a
> $1,000 kennel license fee! A small commercial business that
> provides day care to 10 dogs a day, would be licensed as a
> 3,000-dog kennel when the years total of paper dogs are
> tallied! Dog sitting and day care are rapidly growing home
> businesses in modern America that greatly enhance the welfare of
> companion animals.
> People who do this valuable work would be driven out of business,
> and dog owners who need these services would be harmed.
>
>
> The unlimited power to create regulations without oversight also
> will affect individual dog owners decisions about how to care for
> their animals. The Bureau would be granted the power to create
> regulations that specify how anyone who owns a dog must house or
> care for it. For example, the Bureau would have the power to ban
> tethering of dogs with no action required by the Legislature. This
> both denies dog owners their basic rights as citizens, and also
> allows elected officials to escape accountability to the voters.
>
>
> The legislation also imposes unnecessary restrictions on rescue
> groups that rely on foster care provided by private individuals
> who care for a dog until a new owner can be found. The American
> Sporting Dog Alliance believes that animal shelters and rescue
> shelters should be regulated intensely as commercial kennels,
> because of the large numbers of dogs involved and because the high
> turnover of dogs from unknown sources increases the risk of
> disease and other problems. However, we do not believe that people
> who provide foster care to small numbers of rescued dogs should be
> subjected to this kind of intensive regulation. The law should not
> discourage these dedicated and caring people who do much good work
> to save the lives of many dogs. We propose a lesser standard of
> licensure for these small rescue and fostering homes, such as a
> token license fee and inspections only if a complaint has been
> filed. Care standards in foster homes should be simply defined as
> the normal standard of care for household pets. In plain English,
> these good people deserve to be given a break, as do the dogs they
> help.
>
>
> In all cases, the legislation says that the burden of proof rests
> with the owner of the dog. This is a perversion of the American
> system of justice, which holds that the burden of proof rests with
> the state. What the wording of the legislation means is that any
> dog owner is automatically guilty of a violation if he or she is
> unable to prove his or her innocence.
>
> The American Sporting Dog Alliance urges every Pennsylvania dog
> owner to immediately contact every member of the House Agriculture
> and Rural Affairs Committee, well before Thursdays hearing.
> Please refer to House Bill 2525, and tell the legislators why you
> are opposed to this bill.
>
> Here is contact information for every member of the committee
>
> Rep. Arthur D. Hershey
>
> 717-783-6435
>
> 717-705-1868
>
> [email protected] <mailto:ahershey%40pahousegop.com>
>
> Rep. Michele Brooks
>
> 717-783-5008
>
> 717-705-1948
>
> [email protected] <mailto:mbrooks%40pahousegop.com>
>
> Rep. Timothy Joseph Solobay
>
> 717-787-1188
>
> 717-705-1887
>
> [email protected] <mailto:tsolobay%40pahouse.net>
>
> Rep. Peter J. Daley II
>
> 717-783-9333
>
> 717-783-7558
>
> [email protected] <mailto:dzeiders%40pahouse.net>
>
> Rep. Tim Mahoney
>
> 717-775-2174
>
> 717-780-4786
>
> [email protected] <mailto:tmahoney%40pahouse.net>
>
> Rep. Bob Bastian
>
> 717-783-8756
>
> 717-783-3899
>
> [email protected] <mailto:bbastian%40pahousegop.com>
>
> Rep. Thomas F. Yewcic
>
> 717-783-0248
>
> 717-787-4922
>
> [email protected] <mailto:tyewcic%40pahouse.net>
>
> Rep. Gary Haluska
>
> 717-787-3532
>
> 717-783-7548
>
> [email protected] <mailto:ghaluska%40pahouse.net>
>
> Chairman Michael K. Hanna
>
> 717-772-2283
>
> 717-787-4137
>
> [email protected] <mailto:mhanna%40pahouse.net>
>
> Rep. H. Scott Conklin
>
> 717-787-9473
>
> 717-780-4764
>
> [email protected] <mailto:sconklin%40pahouse.net>
>
> Rep. Mike Fleck
>
> 717-787-3335
>
> 717-260-6504
>
> [email protected] <mailto:mfleck%40pahousegop.com>
>
> Rep. Mark K. Keller
>
> 717-783-1593
>
> 717-705-7012
>
> [email protected] <mailto:mkeller%40pahousegop.com>
>
> Rep. Robert W. Kauffman
>
> 717-705-2004
>
> 717-705-1951
>
> [email protected] <mailto:rkauffma%40pahousegop.com>
>
> Rep. Dan Moul
>
> 717-783-5217
>
> None Given
>
> [email protected] <mailto:dmoul%40pahousegop.com>
>
> Rep. P. Michael Sturla
>
> (717) 787-3555
>
> (717) 705-1923
>
> [email protected] <mailto:rep.mikesturla%40pahouse.net>
>
> Rep. David S. Hickernell
>
> 717-783-2076
>
> 717-705-1946
>
> [email protected] <mailto:dhickern%40pahousegop.com>
>
> Rep. Gordon R. Denlinger
>
> 717-787-3531
>
> 717-705-1951
>
> [email protected] <mailto:gdenling%40pahousegop.com>
>
> Rep. David R. Millard
>
> 717-783-1102
>
> 717-772-0094
>
> [email protected] <mailto:dmillard%40pahousegop.com>
>
> Rep. Tina Pickett
>
> 717-783-8238
>
> 717-705-1949
>
> [email protected] <mailto:tpickett%40pahousegop.com>
>
> Rep. Karen Boback
>
> 717-787-1117
>
> 717-705-1889
>
> [email protected] <mailto:kboback%40pahouse.net>
>
> Rep. Mike Carroll
>
> 717-787-3589
>
> 717-780-4763
>
> [email protected] <mailto:mcarroll%40pahouse.net>
>
> Rep. Jim Cox
>
> 717-772-2435
>
> 717-260-6516
>
> [email protected] <mailto:jcox%40pahousegop.com>
>
> Rep. David R. Kessler
>
> 717-787-2769
>
> 717-780-4768
>
> [email protected] <mailto:dkessler%40pahouse.net>
>
> Rep. Richard T. Grucela
>
> 717-705-1878
>
> 717-783-3180
>
> [email protected] <mailto:rgrucela%40pahouse.net>
>
> Rep. Babette Josephs
>
> 717-787-8529
>
> 717-787-5066
>
> [email protected] <mailto:RepJosephs%40pahouse.net>
>
> Rep. Harold James
>
> 717-787-9477
>
> 717-787-7517
>
> [email protected] <mailto:hjames%40pahouse.net>
>
> Rep. Frank Louis Oliver Sr.
>
> 717-787-3480
>
> 717-783-0684
>
> [email protected] <mailto:foliver%40pahouse.net>
>
> Rep. Rosita C. Youngblood
>
> 717-787-7727
>
> 717-772-1313
>
> [email protected] <mailto:ryoungbl%40pahouse.net>
>
> Rep. John Myers
>
> 717-787-3181
>
> 717-772-4038
>
> [email protected] <mailto:jmyers%40pahouse.net>
>
> Rep. Mark B. Cohen
>
> 717-787-4117
>
> 717-787-6650
>
> [email protected] <mailto:mcohen%40pahouse.net>
>
> The American Sporting Dog Alliance represents owners, hobby
> breeders and professionals who work with breeds of dogs that are
> used for hunting. 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. Please visit us on the web at
> http://www.americansportingdogalliance.org.
> <http://www.americansportingdogalliance.org.>
>
> 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 the donations of
> our members, and maintain strict independence.
>
> PLEASE CROSS-POST AND FORWARD THIS REPORT TO YOUR FRIENDS
>
>
>
> The American Sporting Dog Alliance
> http://www.americansportingdogalliance.org
> <http://www.americansportingdogalliance.org>
>
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
945 Posts
crazy. I was wondering how I can email this to my mother-in-law who lives in PA and also has a dog.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
27,460 Posts
Re:New PA Proposed Dog Legislation

Before everyone just over reacts and hates this law, keep in mind that PA has the most Puppy Mills in the USA for a reason. And it's because the CURRENT PA dog laws are so poor it's easy for them to exist and be in line with the laws.

So if people would read the proposed law for themselves and then contact their legislators with specific recommendations and concerns rather than a such a general freak out the entire bill collapses (and allows PA to continue to have the most Puppy Mills in the entire USA...................).

The actual law (gee, go figure someone would read that
) is on:

http://www.legis.state.pa.us/cfdocs/billinfo/billinfo.cfm?syear=2007&sInd=0&body=H&type=B&bn=2525

Other views on the new proposed law can be seen:

http://www.agriculture.state.pa.us/doglawaction/site/default.asp

http://www.state.pa.us/papower/cwp/view.asp?A=11&Q=473917

Just hate to 'throw out the baby with the bath water'. And keeping in mind the last time the PA Dog Law was ammended looks like it was in 1982...

For those that need to refresh themselves on the what LEGAL conditions and facilities would look like in a PA Puppy Mill (though these videos were in Indiana). Generally puppy mills are regulated by the USDA rules/regs UNLESS the state has more stringent guidelines. So if the Feds allow it, and the state has no laws, so be it.

http://www.youtube.com/user/PetShopPuppies

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YWbGZJeYtTs
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
31,891 Posts
Re:New PA Proposed Dog Legislation

Everyone says that about Ohio, too. Ohio's laws are so poor they cannot possibly just enforce them. I disagree. It seems to me that Georgia has bazillions of Shepherds being euthanized in shelters there. And other states as well. On the Rescue pages, I see PA represented, but not any more than some of these other places.

Puppy mills are terrible because they practice cruelty and neglect (which becomes cruelty). If they would only make laws defining cruelty and up the penalties for cruelty, and then enforce the laws, these problems would be seriously reduced. But when it comes right down to it, so long as people will walk into a pet store and buy a puppy from the high school kid behind the counter, there will be puppy mills. If PA becomes an unwelcome place, they will move their operations to Georgia, Tennessee, any number of places.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
355 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
Re:New PA Proposed Dog Legislation

I agree with Maggie Rose Lee, I posted so people are aware but you also need to read carefully. We do need tougher laws concerning puppy mills. Deb
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,424 Posts
This part freaks me out!

"Pending legislation would target people who own dogs that have
> docked tails or cropped ears, and this database would allow the
> Bureau to locate and file animal cruelty charges (a serious crime)
> for anyone who is unable to provide proof that the work was done
> by a veterinarian. Few owners of dogs are able to provide written
> proof, even though a veterinarian probably docked their dogs tail
> or cropped its ears."
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,165 Posts
1 - 7 of 7 Posts
Top