
This is a placeholder text
Group text

by wuzzup on 23 January 2009 - 17:01

by Baldursmom on 23 January 2009 - 17:01
Well, I am going to write Tom Cross and Linda Holmes and suggest some exemptions for people that are hobbies that only produce one to two litters per year. Require registration with the state and annual cetifications notorized for people with intack show or trail dogs that will not be breed but that are not altered due to showing or trails.
It is a lead in to mandatory spay and neuter law, either be condidered a breeder if you have three intact females or spay them.

by Baldursmom on 23 January 2009 - 17:01
by Johnsk9 on 23 January 2009 - 17:01
Here is an analysis of this proposed Florida mandatory S/N law, so far.
You can take ALL of it with a grain of salt, because if it passes into law, it is always subject to revision, later on. This is the "foot in the door" or seduction tactic. They go in sounding reasonable, and twist the thing to screw everyone, later on.
This is not per my opinion, only. This is what I was told by a lawyer and dog breeder in California, who has fought these things for a long time, now. I believed her after she explained the process to me.
Also, you can think that you have a deal hammered out with the proponents of the new law, something everyone can live with, and then, in the last few days or hours, they submit revisions which are really toxic (bait and switch).
One thing is for sure.. sooner or later, they will work it around to what they want. It's too bad, really. You have to stop these laws right at the gate and don't let them get in.
And (since this seems to be your style of thinking), don't even imagine for a minute that you will somehow be exempted or safe, and that a lot of the others (backyard breeders, etc.) will be put out of business, so that you possibly get more market share. It doesn't work like that. That's what they are hoping you will believe, of course! They just want their law passed, and they are perfectly willing to whisper sweet nothings in your ear, if you will help them or consent to what they want. You will find yourself out in the cold, and your dogs impounded or dead.
AKC would like to think also that they will be able to protect their own market share by going along with this sort of crap, and they nearly did (last PAWS revision, sponsored by Senator Santorum, PA (R).. ). They were allegedly trying to make a sweetheart deal with HSUS, and then the other dog people found out about it and allegedly they nearly had an AKC mutiny! Then, AKC changed their position to "oppose", and it didn't pass.
Dog breeders / fanciers in California have beaten mandatory S/N now at least twice, and it has been overturned in one county that tried to pass it. But you don't have as many dog people in Florida, I think. This is why HSUS targetted Florida for passage of the "no gestation crate" law for swine. There were practically no commercial swine producers in Florida. Lots of silly old blue hairs, too, who are normally conservative but suckers for animals!

by Two Moons on 23 January 2009 - 17:01
by Johnsk9 on 23 January 2009 - 17:01

by Two Moons on 23 January 2009 - 17:01
by RDH on 23 January 2009 - 17:01
It will even be better if you have a big group of breeders write a letter to whom ever it concerns.
At one time I wanted to make tons of flyers in regards to puppy mills and pet stores (all they have to do is google) and put them on peoples car in the parking lot of my local petland to educate the public. There's a big sign saying no soliciting...so i didn't want to get into legal trouble.
Also, I wish more breeders will screen their potential buyers before letting the dogs go. Too many people don't research the breed before they buy and throw them out like they are trash, because they can't handle the commitment.

by wuzzup on 23 January 2009 - 18:01

by VonIsengard on 23 January 2009 - 19:01
Contact information Disclaimer Privacy Statement Copyright Information Terms of Service Cookie policy ↑ Back to top