Westminster tonight

Liesje

But what if they do both?  Are they only one or the other?  And if so, would they choose to be training vs. breeding?  The breeder's I've got my dogs from breed, train, show, work, and board.

I didn't think of that. If they have fifteen breeding age, intact females then under that proposed legislation they would fit the definition of a commercial breeder.  This is the kind of thing that gets people up in arms and I can understand why.  Many retriever and pointer trainers, who might also breed occasionally, would come under this definition. It's impossible to write legislation that covers only the "bad" without loopholes (whether intentional or not) that can lead to persecution of breeders who are legitimate, responsible people.  It's a big ol mess and one that has no simple solution that will make everyone happy. 

I do believe that you can't legislate responsibility but also believe the laws should have some teeth in them so puppy mill operators face criminal charges and hefty fines.  Not that that will discourage all puppy mill operators who will just move to a new location and start up again.

I'm thinking about what problem I personally have with puppy mills, and I think my main beef are the ones where the dogs are kept in deplorable conditions.  But most places *already* have laws and codes in place dictating a minimum standard of care.  This is why I don't support additional legislation.  It screws good people (those people who have more than the arbitrary amount of dogs and do an excellent job training, showing, and working their dogs), and we should just be enforcing the rules that are already in place.  As much as I don't like the commercial breeding of pet dogs, I can't say I support trying to ban that either.  It's a free country and people are free to do as they please with their dogs as long as the minimum standard of care is met.  I don't like the slippery slope.  I already do things with my dogs that are banned in other countries.

 As you all know I am truly clueless about breeders, showing, kenneling etc.  I take Lani's point that co-owned dogs could somehow be erroneously counted as breeding bitches BUT I would think that would be easy to write in so that there was no confusion. Which brings me to a saying that in my opinion and only an opinion I don't think that a breeder with 15+ breeding bitches is a)trying to improve the breed and b)non-commercial. That is what I believe and no one will change my thoughts on that. I would never buy a pup who had 15 litters regularly. No way they would do the appropriate ground work with all those pups and if you were doing 1 or 2 litters a year why would you need 15 breeding bitches??

again I admit to have limited knowledge on this

So the most important part of this bill - for me - is that anyone over that 15 breeding bitches had to pass inspections, be licensed and registered. As it stands in this state we have no requirements so anyone can set up a large breeding operation and not have any regulations (they have some provisions but they are less than they are for livestock).  The only mills that make the news are ones that they can process as cruelty. Those are only found by accident (one went on fire last year) or if someone discovers it.

I stand by my statement that anyone interested in their breed and breeding at even a 'good' level wouldn't find it problematic to pass annual inspections, be required to provide veterinary care, and to register their breeding program.  Anyone unwilling to do those things, in my eyes, is not legit.

Certainly if someone is a 'professional' breeder they should have to follow the standards of professionals in most fields. 

And Lies I too use things that are illegal in other countries with my dog (e-collar) but this feels like an attempt to professionalize a field that wants to be considered professionals.  I know if I was running a breeding program I would want to separate myself in all ways possible from mills and an opportunity to professionalize would be very welcome

But therein lies the problem, we all have different ideas about what makes a kennel "legit".  I don't personally require vet care.  I look at health clearances and the lines' history of health clearances relative to common problems with the breed, but I'm not upset if a breeder hasn't taken a healthy dog to the vet in 3 years.  I don't personally take my dogs to the vet unless there's something wrong with them.  We have to have rabies vaccinations once every three years so unless there's a problem that's how often my dogs go. 

Also I don't like seeing good, honest breeders getting charged for "registrations" and "permits" and "licenses" while backyard breeding goes unchecked as long as the breeders don't report it.  How do we know who has 15 dogs and who doesn't?  If we just ask people report it themselves, honest people have to pay the money and jump through hoops but there's no enforcement of dishonest people blatantly ignoring regulations.

And what about people who broker dogs but don't breed?  They can have 200 dogs in their kennel but fly under the radar because they aren't a "commercial breeder"?

I'm not trying to be argumentative I just think trying to tackle the problem from this angle is futile.

kpwlee

I don't think that a breeder with 15+ breeding bitches is a)trying to improve the breed

The proposed legislation didn't specify "breeding bitches".  It said intact females of breeding age. 

Texas is in the process of writing a puppy mill law and much of the same arguing is happening here.

Liesje

And what about people who broker dogs but don't breed?  They can have 200 dogs in their kennel but fly under the radar because they aren't a "commercial breeder"?

Good point.  They are the facilitators of the whole puppy mill operation in this country.

Anyone who scratches the surface on these operations will learn they can often be a network of people who house and move animals around, covering their trails with documentations to keep themselves within the law.  OR, they operate completely under the radar (particularly brokers).  All it takes is 3 people to own 5 intact females each and you're not a commerical breeder by the way that bill is written. 

**this** also gives me nightmares:

(1a) Establish standards for the care of animals at commercial breeding operations. The standards adopted shall include provisions for adequate daily exercise, adequate veterinary care, appropriate housing for intact female dogs of breeding age, females with litters and weaned puppies, and record keeping."

I read a version of a different bill that tried to do this "establishment of standards" and it called for dogs to be housed at a monitored 80 degrees.  I wonder how a Malamute would fair under those conditions. 

Make good cruelty laws and provide funding to enforce them.  Then any breeder, owner, caretaker, broker is under the same expectation that if you care for ONE dog in a way that is unsafe and inhumane, that violating the existing laws will put you in jail, cause you a fine, etc, etc.

The way this is written leaves me a couple of big question:

I just don't like the arbitrary numbers/labels.  Like everyone who has X number of dogs *must* be a neglectful, irresponsible puppymill or people who do X-activity *must* certainly be top breeders.  There are terrible breeders with 2 dogs, excellent breeders with 20 dogs, terrible brokers, top quality brokers, breeders who show and work their dogs but cannot maintain a bare minimum standard of care, and breeders who keep their dogs as house pets but have extensive knowledge and experience with their lines.  IMO if you don't like it, just don't buy it.

I see this all the time on the GSD boards, certain people spent countless hours trying to label everything and everyone and convince everyone that in order for a breeder to not be this or that, they have to meet all these requirements that *they* have decided make one an "ethical" breeder.  Half the time the people doing all this labeling and flow-charting of who should be allowed to breed or have never actually studied the history of the breed, the specific lines and what can be carried over various pedigrees when you out-cross or line-breed, what dogs express what desirable and undesirable characteristics, heck half of them wouldn't know a top quality GSD if one came up and licked them in the face.... if everyone spent less time trying to poke around other peoples' business and used that time and energy to actually gain valuable knowledge and experience with their breed, in general we'd all be better educated when it comes to making choices about what dogs to buy and where to buy them from.  JMHO

Also I do not like how in this country people seem to want to blame everyone but themselves for making the wrong decision.  I'm sorry but it's not THAT hard to find a purebred dog that isn't from a puppy mill or two dogs chained up in some backyard.  If people want healthy, hearty dogs with good temperaments then do the research and find one.  Don't expect to just walk into some pet store for instant gratification and a deal and walk out with a top quality dog.

 Excellent post Liesje - totally agree!