No more kennels in Los Angeles? - Page 1

IF THIS WAS PREVIOUSLY POSTED, PLEASE FORGIVE ME.  I COPIED AND PASTED IT FROM THE GREENBOARD:  http://www.gsdworld.net/invboard/index.php?showtopic=19358&hl=los+angeles

Don't make the mistake of thinking this is not about everyone who owns animals. Anyone interested in voicing opposition should contact Mike Antonovich's field office at 661 726-3600.

By all means, cross post and forward.

The story unfolds

It now appears that Supervisor Antonovich, (who "presides" over the large portion of NE Los Angeles County) asked two groups, Best Friends and Last Chance for Animal to initiate and be part of a task force consisting of various L.A. County departments. This was a Fait accompli when presented to Board of Supervisors on March 3. The directives were to review existing ordinances in all the departments and bring forth suggestions and possible amendments "for improving the
quality of care for the animals and ensuring responsible and safe dog breeding"

There are NO kennel owners on the task force, they added Ed Buck (Golden Retriever Rescue, AR adherent) and on 9/22 brought amendments that increased licensing fees and created large renewal delinquency fees. They also redefined kennels to various "facilities" ...Breeding, boarding, training.. and "hobby breeders." This was accomplished with the normal "no notice" (published on Friday afternoon before the Tuesday A.M. BOS meeting.

THEN the group worked on Zoning requirements. They, in effect, created no breeding in any of the established kennels in A2 (Agricultural, 2+ acres), where 90% of the existing licensed kennels who have breeding are situated. Only "breeding facilities" would be allowed in manufacturing zones. This was changed after Regional Planning Department (RPD) ?slipped? and correctly gave a 30 day notice which was picked up and widely distributed. The "new" wording was
that kennels which has breeding now as an"accesory to their kennel license, could, within 5 years of the passed ordinance obtain a conditional use permit (CUP).

Sounds fair, right? A concerned person called to find out the particulars on obtaining a CUP. They were told that it would cost about $8-9 thousand dollars and would require a public hearing! And we still haven't seen the second surprise, Coming is MORE amendments from Dept.of Animal Care and Control (DACC) (Mayeda). They are creating amendments for the care and sheltering of dogs and cats.

This is all from a task force that has THREE AR groups represented, no kennel owners and was planned with no input from those it would affect. What I can't understand is the lack of uprising and hell from those affected right now. Most have been contacted in some fashion or another, yet remain quiescent and silent.

I don't breed, and don't own a kennel.

Stormy Hope
www.carpoc.org
AKC Legislative Liaison, GSDCA
Sunshine Squad GSDs and more
-------------------

Anne
www.adlerstein.com

CONTINUED FROM ABOVE:
update
As mentioned in the above post, the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors are attempting to eliminate dog breeding in the County of Los Angeles. Using the term Puppy Mill to paint all breeders with the same “ black brush“, the Regional Planning dept is now planning to make dog breeding on A2 property illegal.

Almost all dog kennels in Los Angeles County are located on A2 property since we were informed by Animal Control, Regional Planning and Building and Safety , that it was legal. ALL of these County Depts signed off on our Kennel permit applications, approving us as “dog kennels“. This was the definition of dog kennel up until a month ago when they changed it in order to further discriminate against dog breeders:

Dog kennel” means any lot, building, structure, enclosure or premises whereupon or wherein four or more dogs, over four months of age, are kept or maintained for any purpose, including places where dogs are boarded, kept for sale, or kept for hire.

Now after approving our kennels, some of which have been in existence for 40 years, Regional Planning is claiming that there is a 1971 ordinance that made dog breeding illegal on A2 and that they had simply approved it as an “accessory use”. We have asked for copies of this ordinance but have been told it is not available. They are claiming this gives them the right to now discontinue breeding as a permitted use in A2 zones.

Late last year, one kennel and two rescue groups were investigated by Animal Rights groups and dogs were subsequently seized by the county. Now the Los Angeles Board of Supervisors, advised by Animal Rights Groups, are using these incidents, (claiming that a “huge” problem exists,) to rip away the rights of breeders to use their land for the purpose it was purchased for.

I realize that people might just think this has no impact on them but I will simply say that if they can do this to us, they can do it to you, and WILL sooner or late. This action on the part of the LA County Board of Supervisors is simply outrageous as they are now labeling all breeders in the unincorporated areas of Los Angeles “Puppy Mills”. There is no legal definition of a puppy mill. It is a slur used by certain groups to paint all breeders in a negative light. It is a slur that incites anger, hatred and negative emotions in the general public. The Los Angeles Board of Supervisors are using this slur to persecute, penalize and punish all of the licensed breeders in LA County who have never had dogs confiscated for lack of care, never been sited for illegal activities involving the breeding of their dogs, have consistently received “A” ratings from the Dept of Animal Care and Control and have done everything reasonable people would do to comply with the counties laws and ordinances.

This burns me up.  Even worse, the AKC, in all of its wisdom, insists on holding the Eukanuba national (its premiere event) in Long Beach.  If AKC had any concern for dog enthusiasts, it would boycott the entire state of Kalifornia and its rabid animal rightists. 

CONTINUED FROM ABOVE:

I am urging everyone who lives in LA County to contact their County Supervisor and voice their opposition to these outrageous actions.

Downtown Office
500 West Temple Street, Room 869
Los Angeles, CA 90012
(213) 974-5555
(213) 974-1010 FAX

Antelope Valley
1113 W. Avenue M-4, Suite A
Palmdale, CA 93551
(661) 726-3600
Norm Hickling, Field Deputy

Pasadena
215 N. Marengo Ave., Suite 120
Pasadena, CA 91101
(626) 356-5407
Sussy Nemer, Field Deputy

San Gabriel Valley
615 East Foothill Blvd., Suite A
San Dimas, CA 91773
(909) 394-2264
Juventino "J" Gomez, Field Deputy

Santa Clarita Valley
23920 Valencia Blvd., Suite 265
Santa Clarita, CA 91355
(661) 287-3657
Rosalind Wayman, Field Deputy

San Fernando Valley
21943 Plummer Street
Chatsworth, CA 91311
(818) 993-5170
Millie Jones, Field Deputy

Edited by Vandal (10/27/09 11:42 AM)
_________________________
Anne
www.adlerstein.com


--------------------

Anne
www.adlerstein.com

Wow;  this could truly be diseastrous.  Are you sure they can follow through with all these threats? 

Sorry for any confusion, I am not Anne, I was cross pointing the article and her subsequent post.  Personally I don't know enough to know whether or not they can follow through with the threats.  I agree, this could be disastrous for LA breeders, trainers, and boarding kennels.

In my area there are very strict requirements about where kennels can be built. Further, there are also very strict requirements about licensing. I was dismayed to see my license fees increase this next time to $350 a year. Before I bought this land and built this facility, I lost $1000 on an application for a conditional use permit in a mountain county. I was slated to purchase 11 acres of land, in a very rural area, next to a major highway. Three residents of the valley came and spoke against my permit being granted because they did not want a kennel next to them (the closest of any of these three would have been to my property would have been about a mile away). They complained about how the noise would be, they complained about how terrible the odors would be, and they complained about increased traffic on the highway. The vote in committee was 2-2 and I was denied the permit and lost my $1000 application fee. Fortunately, my contract on the property was contingent on getting that permit or I would have lost my earnest money too. The point is, people who have been irresponsible as breeders, kennel owners, and dog owners period, have soured the public perception to the point that now any regulations, whether reasonable or not, whether likely to help the situation or not, get proposed. 

All I see people like us doing is fighting those changes, but no one makes alternative suggestions to fix the problems. But we continue on, as always, and eventually, our lack of solutions will mean more draconian measures do get passed.

All I see people like us doing is fighting those changes, but no one makes alternative suggestions to fix the problems. But we continue on, as always, and eventually, our lack of solutions will mean more draconian measures do get passed.

I agree we need to propose solutions.  One of the simplest solutions to the problems dogs cause is most likely in most municipal codes, and has been for decades.  We must insist municipalities enforce leash laws.  In addition, we need to encourage low-cost, or even free, spay/neuter clinics (believe me when I caution you will be in for the fight of your life, from local veterinarians on this one).

Many local AKC kennel clubs offer low cost training to the disadvantaged.  Schutzhund trainers are very experienced and competent trainers.  It would really help if local trainers would consider helping their communities with a class for low income people perhaps once a year (or more, if you really feel charitable).  People dump dogs more for behavioral problems than for any other reason.

Finally, all dog enthusiasts should find out if their state has an organization like California's Pet Pac.  They need to get involved, and, if possible, they need to attend any hearing on dog laws in their locality.  Remember, all politics is truly local.

Micky

.