His Fine Feathered Friends, And Ours

Read my previous post again, Bennett. PAWS would have madated standards for large commercial facilities that would be difficult at best for in home breeders to meet in a home setting. To the contrary, Benett, PAWS would CONTRIBUTE to the downfall of of the purebred dog since most in home hobby breeders would be hard pressed at best to meet the requirements designed for large Commercial facilities. Subsequently, there would only be an increase in the number of animals imported from uninspected foreign facilities.
Not too smart.
Plus, facilities that are substandard in nature have long been violating existing regulations. How would more laws change this?

The bottom line is that people don't have the right to manipulate or to breed dogs and cats... If people want toys, they should buy inanimate objects. If they want companionship, they should seek it with their own kind.
Ingrid newkirk- Animals

The bill had nothing to do with small private breeders.

The bill was aimed at larger breeders.

But small private breeders decided to whip themselves into a hysterical frenzy, spread lies, and support the puppy mills.

The hobbyist breeders are helping to support the downfall of the purebred dog world. As long as hobbyist breeders keep opposing laws to crack down on puppy mills, the puppy mills destroy the image of the purebred dog.

The purebred dog world is headed for oblivion, and hobbyist breeders are helping to send it there by supporting the puppy mills (while you waste your time trying to pin the blame on humane groups.)

Not too smart.

Sentence edit:

"Ironically, if such provisions that you seemingly support were to be put into place, it would place MORE in home breeders in violation of zoning laws by having to comply with PAWS!"

The bill had alot to do with in home breeders, Bennett. PAWS would have imposed provisions that would be difficult, and too costly, for most in home breeders to meet in a home setting. Ironically, if such provisions that you seemingly support were to be put into place, it would place MORE in home breeders in violation of zoning laws! Note that this would not apply for those who had 25 or fewer cats/dogs and.or sell fewer than six litters of those animals. But this threshold of 25 and 6 sets a precedent and how will we know that that that number would not be lowered incrementally later on to make in home breeding even more difficult, or downright impossible?

The bill in 2005 had nothing to do with small, private breeders. It was a PUPPY MILL regulatory bill.

If you are trying to make a point, Eric, don't lie at least.

But the "hobbyist" breeders (to protect their friends the puppy millers) whipped themselves into a frenzy to oppose the laws by lying to each other and the public.

Eric has reproduced the LIES and GARBAGE that the "hobbyist" breeders came up with to oppose puppy mill regulation.

All lies. All garbage.

"Hobbyist" breeders support puppy mills. They support unregulated businesses. They support puppy mill abuse.

They will say ANYTHING *(including lie) to oppose rules and regulations for puppy mills by falsely claiming that such rules will affect small private breeders.

The small private breeders want the puppy mills to stay in business because the puppy mills pay for dog shows and breed club activities and purebred dog promotion.
.

A federal bill that failed in 2005 for the licensing of PRIVATE Hobby breeders would have:

puts federal inspectors in private homes, an intrusion that USDA argued against in federal court;
places home breeders in violation of many residential planning and zoning codes by classifying them as dealers;
siphons USDA resources from large wholesale operations housing hundreds of animals to home breeders keeping a small number of pets;
diverts USDA focus away from the middlemen, wholesale dealers, transporters and brokers that were the original targets of the AWA;
is poorly written and thus open to broad interpretation and lawsuits;
would destroy the agency's ability to concentrate its resources on large facilities that present the greatest risk of violations;
federally regulates retail dealers, including home breeders, that are already subject to public oversight, peer review, and state and local laws that govern humane treatment of animals;
dodges a federal court decision that affirmed the right of the Secretary of Agriculture to exempt home breeders from the regulations;
is backed by animal rights groups that oppose pet breeding and have a record of using laws to harass and intimidate those who own animals;
deletes exemptions for some retail pet sellers by redefining a dealer as someone who exceeds a threshold number of litters raised and dogs sold;
will require hobby breeders to meet standards of housing and care that have not yet been written; and
fails to exempt individuals and organizations that rescue dogs and place them in new homes.
Background

How can a business make MORE money by hiding?That makes no sense. How would prospective customers know about them then?

After reading the posts from the self-designated "responsible" breeders here, it becomes clear that they're protesting a bit too much. People who proclaim loudly that they're in it for the "love" of the animals, and then oppose anti-cruelty legislation are really greaseballs. They're running businesses, and should be regulated just like any other business.

eric-716 - If your business is unlicensed and you aren't reporting your income, how would you be "drowning in an ocean of debt" on taxes you aren't paying?

This NAIA group seems worse still. This is a bunch of people who profit from animal exploitation trying to tell us civilians that they know how animals should be treated. I think they should all volunteer to trade places with the animals they're taking care of so well - especially the furriers!

In the end, I think it would be lovely if we stopped this whole notion of pets altogether
Ingrid Newkirk- Newsday

Hobby breeders ARE businesses who are making money UNDER THE TABLE.

And thanks to groups like NAIA and people like Patti Strand who have exposed their activities, it is now clear that we need to take a good look at these breed clubs and federations and the individuals running these businesses.

Are they licensed? Are they paying taxes? Are they breaking dog limit laws? Are they breaking zoning laws?

Patti Strand and NAIA have pointed a big red arrow at these underground businesses.

Surely the most senseless statement I have seen is "Wouldn't you think that, if breeders who are businesses were not paying their income taxes, that they would be drowning in an ocean of debt and penalties of hundreds of dollars, and subsequently, be unable to stay in business?"

Not if they aren't reporting their income and are HIDING their businesses!

They make MORE money because they don't pay TAXES.

Like drug dealers and organized crime.

"They run unlicensed businesses and don't pay taxes on income"

That is because HOBBY breeders are not businesses and who do not earn salaries by breeding. Wouldn't you think that, if breeders who are businesses were not paying their income taxes, that they would be drowning in an ocean of debt and penalties of hundreds of dollars, and subsequently, be unable to stay in business?

???They sell genetically defective dogs, and don't pay vet bills but promise a "free" puppy later on

Genetic screening for their animals is widely available and utilized by breed enthusiasts:
http://www.workingdogs.com/genetics.htm
http://www.healthgene.com/canine/breeds.asp

I???ve taken a liking to attaching animal rights quotes at the end of each post too:
My whole goal is for humans to have as little contact as possible with animals.
- Associated Press (December 7, 1998) Gary Yourofsky, Humane Education lecturer

And large commercial puppy mill kennels are in EVERY STATE IN THIS COUNTRY, most of them unlicensed and operating in secret.

(Many are selling to pet stores and don't have USDA licensing, but go unpunished for breaking federal laws

Or they escape that by selling online. There are no requirements for licensing if puppies are sold online, a common practice of the millers to hide operations and profits.)

There are few state laws for licensing because the puppy millers and AKC and "responsible breeders" oppose laws and licensing.

Greed and selfishness let the suffering continue.

"Responsible breed enthusausts" are business people who promote and sell purebred dogs.

Their dog shows and breed club activities are paid for with AKC puppy mill reistration money.

Purebred dogs are riddled with genetic defects because of inbreeding (yes, the "show dog breeders")

They don't alter puppies before sale, and their altering contracts are legally useless.

They sell genetically defective dogs, and don't pay vet bills but promise a "free" puppy later on

Their breeds clubs engage in lobbying against anti-cruelty laws to protect profits

They run unlicensed businesses and don't pay taxes on income

They have breeds clubs that elect the owner of the BIGGEST PUPPY MILL BROKER IN THE U.S. (with a history of complaints and abuses) to breed club membership.

The "responsible breed enthusiasts" are far from ethical or responsible.

The USDA has a long history of FAILURE to enforce regulations. Even USDA inspectors have come forward to expose USDA cover-ups of abusive breeders and criminal breeder activities.

The USDA has put itself in the position of ENABLING puppy mills.

And MOST breeders are not USDA licensed, anyway.

NAIA is a puppy mill lobbying group that opposes any and all rules about animal care and breeding.

NAIA also supports animal abuse, and has had relatives of animal abusers on its board.

NAIA also calls mongels "defective mutts" that should be killed.

If NAIA is opposed to any form of regulation, how come they have a model law that defines neglect as "An overt act involving failure to provide for animal health or safety, including but not limited to
failure to provide adequate food, water, shelter, exercise, or necessary veterinary care to an animal or to
adequately confine an animal in a manner appropriate to its species, breed, age, and condition".?
http://www.naiaonline.org/pdfs/NAIA%20Model%20Animal%20Control%20Law%20Final.pdf

How come you never answer any of my questions Bennett? Responsible breed enthusiasts should not be confused with "puppy mills", which are the substandard ones. Generally, if AKC discovers such a facility, they will suspend their registration abilities and notify the appropriate authorities. Operations that are commercial in nature are required to be USDA licensed, and if USDA inspectors discover poor animal care/neglect, that facility will have its licenses under the Animal Welfare Act suspended or revoked and be fined. Few states have kennel licensing and inspections programs because few states are home to large numbers of commercial kennels that produce a high volume of animals for sale as pets

To the contrary, dog breed enthusiasts, are those who ...,

* They breed and raise dogs in their homes, typically keeping one or two (sometimes three) breeds of dogs in the house or in a clean kennel.
* Their dogs appear healthy and well-socialized.
* Their breeding stock meets the standard of excellence for the breed and is screened for genetic diseases and structural problems prior to producing a litter.
* They study their chosen breeds and make decisions with breed structure, health, and temperament in mind.
* They offer a contract that protects the puppy and the buyer as well as the breeder.
* They participate in breed activities, including dog shows to assess the quality of potential breeding dogs and tests and trials to assess performance ability, and help puppy buyers get involved in these endeavors.
* They join dog clubs and participate in club projects ranging from public education programs and dog training classes to dog shows.

Abuse and neglect and cruelty are common "business" practices of puppy millers, who raise animals as cheaply as possible to maximize profits.

No vet treatment, insufficient shelter, no heat, no cooling, no ventilation, overcrowding, no socialization, no excercise, and more.

Puppy millers make lots of money, and they also cheat consumers with sick and defective puppies.

But because there are so few laws and regulations, they get away with animal abuse and cheating people.

Because they hide their businesses and so few are licensed and inspected, the abuse and neglect and death are hidden from customers.

Many highly profitable animal businesses are built on a foundation of abuse and cruelty, because little to nothing is spent on proper, humane care to MAXIMIZE INCOMES.

It is simply cheaper and more profitable to abuse and neglect.