AB1634 COULD DENY CALIFORNIA PETS MADDIE'S FUND GRANTS

ORIGINAL: janet_rose
Therefore, there will be plenty of puppies to meet demand - albeit less well-bred, properly socialized pups with breeders that act as mentors to their puppy buyers so the pups don't wind up in shelters. That means no reduction in the number of older puppies and dogs surrendered or abandoned - unless you think AB1634 will reduce the population or the percentage of people wanting puppies or the percentage of people that can afford pups. 

ORIGINAL: Bobsk8
This is all speculation by you, that has absoultely zero basis in fact, and is really your opinion. I and many other people totally disagree with your opinion.

Bob, the way that the law of supply and demand works in this country is quite well documented, so I am not speculating at all.  There will be plenty of small pups available to Californians even if AB1634 is passed; puppymills and commercial breeders (in and out of California) will take care of that.   There might be less small puppies in shelters.  There is nothing in AB1634 to decrease the percentage of people who will surrender/abandon their older pups and dogs. 
 
Only if AB1634 drives up the cost of a puppy does it have any chance of encouraging people to get a shelter dog instead of a puppy.  That statement is speculation on my part, but I am pretty sure it is true.
 
Are you aware of any new breeding restrictions that are being put on commerical breeders or puppymills?  AB1634 certainly doesn't establish any. 
 
I say again - AB1634 is just smoke and mirrors when it comes to issue of reducing the number of older dogs and puppies PTS in shelters.

ORIGINAL: cyclefiend2000

Name the person I insulted?

how about everyone showing their dog at the dog show in question? i can  probably get a list if you like.

 
You're going to get a list of the fat people that showed their dog at Westminster?  Really????  LOL

ORIGINAL: janet_rose

ORIGINAL: DogAdvocat
Actually it will affect puppymillers and commercial breeders within the state, because most of them are not going to be involved with competition with their dogs.

Read the text of the current version of the law - not someone's interpretation of the law - the actual text.  Those who obtain a breeder's license are NOT required to do any kind of competition.
 

ORIGINAL: DogAdvocat
[font=verdana]I don't understand why you are saying that there would be less well-bred, properly socialized, mentored dogs because those are not the dogs bred by the backyard breeders that couldn't qualify for the permits. 

[/font]
Qualify for the permits?  I assume you mean qualify for a breeder's license.  Since AB1634 doesn't establish any qualifications, you don't know how difficult they will be to get.  In fact, since a lot of localities don't even have bureaus set up it issue the licenses, some breeders may be caught in the catch-22 of not having a way to get the required license for several years - long enough to destroy a breeding program.

 
It does include qualifications that include having a valid breed recognized by an approved registry, having a dog that is used to show or in sporting competition, obedience, agility, etc. 
 
 

ORIGINAL: janet_rose
There is nothing in AB1634 to decrease the percentage of people who will surrender/abandon their older pups and dogs. 

 
Have you considered that under AB1634 that more pet cats and dogs will be spay neutered, consequently if abandoned and articularly if left to roam those who are spay neutered will not roduce litters of kittens and pups that contribute yet more to the shelter intake numbers.
 

The major part of this bill.  It will not make pet owners more responsible.  People will still dumb animals.  Puppymills can afford these breeding permits, they will ship their dogs out to other areas (they do now) and they will keep breeding.  What will it stop?  Well... it will make people leave CA, CA will lose business, and it will cut down the number of puppies/kittens coming into shelters.  But not older dogs/cats, which those are the animals harder to adopt out.  It will not stop kill shelters and it will not solve overpopulation.  It will, however, make people more willing to buy from puppymills because I can bet that resonsible breeders cannot afford these costs and will probably end up leaving the state.  (which many have reported they would do)
 
I agree, smoke and mirrors.  It isnt stopping anything.  Maybe send all puppymill owners to jail instead.  But most people wouldnt know a puppymill if it smacked them in the face.
 
I dont worry over the bill too much though.  Kudos to those that are keeping this civil.  Good luck. 

You're going to get a list of the fat people that showed their dog at Westminster? Really???? LOL

 
As a matter of fact yes a list of all the people showing their dogs could be obtained.  It's not that hard to get.  I'm not going to publish how easy it is to do because I wouldn't want some extremists discovering how to go about harassing people in the show.
 
 

ORIGINAL: timsdat

You're going to get a list of the fat people that showed their dog at Westminster? Really???? LOL

As a matter of fact yes a list of all the people showing their dogs could be obtained.  It's not that hard to get.  I'm not going to publish how easy it is to do because I wouldn't want some extremists discovering how to go about harassing people in the show.

There is a doctor that goes on CNN every morning and he very often talks about how there are so many overweight and obese people in America due to eating too much and lack of exercise, and then they show pictures of  people walking down the street.  Would you say that he is harrassing and insulting  people?

This is really a rather ridiculous discussion, since the meaning of my post was totally ignored in order to start an argument over me stating what I saw, in my opinion.

The real issue  that should be addressed and the question answered that  I asked  the other day and never got an answer is this:
If what all the Anti California AB1634 people say is true, and AB1634 will not work, then why are people from as far away as Florida so concerned about it's passage?  That seems to be the question that everyone wants to ignore. THe Anti 1634 groups say it won't do anything to reduce the dog population and without taking a breath, add in the statement that there won't be any dogs and cats left if this law is enacted. [8|] You can't have it both ways, even though you wish you could, because it doesn't make any sense to anyone.

I have my opinion about the answer, and it is that these people know that this law will be very effective and are scared to death that it will spread across the country.  Any group of taxpayers that see that millions can be saved by enacting a similar law, will do exactly that.  There is a group in Georgia that are already talking about it.

ORIGINAL: Shadomoon

The major part of this bill.  It will not make pet owners more responsible.  People will still dumb animals.  Puppymills can afford these breeding permits, they will ship their dogs out to other areas (they do now) and they will keep breeding.  What will it stop?  Well... it will make people leave CA, CA will lose business, and it will cut down the number of puppies/kittens coming into shelters.  But not older dogs/cats, which those are the animals harder to adopt out.  It will not stop kill shelters and it will not solve overpopulation.  It will, however, make people more willing to buy from puppymills because I can bet that resonsible breeders cannot afford these costs and will probably end up leaving the state.  (which many have reported they would do)

I agree, smoke and mirrors.  It isnt stopping anything.  Maybe send all puppymill owners to jail instead.  But most people wouldnt know a puppymill if it smacked them in the face.

I dont worry over the bill too much though.  Kudos to those that are keeping this civil.  Good luck. 

Nothing will make pet owners more responsible, just as anything else in society, people have to have a law that tells them what they can and cannot do. Can you imagine doing away with laws on crime, and just teaching people that stealing is wrong and they should be more responsible and not steal.

I looked in the local paper yesterday, and there is ad after ad  after ad, for  puppies in  the Atlanta area. I bet that everyone of these people running these ads considers themselves "responsible breeders". Meanwhile dogs are being executed in shelters every day, in the same city. This situation is ridiculous, but it goes on and on, and most people don't give a hoot about what happens to these animals.

then why are people from as far away as Florida so concerned about it's passage? That seems to be the question that everyone wants to ignore.

 
We have answered this question over and over again.
 

There is a group in Georgia that are already talking about it.

 
You just answered your own question.
 

Any group of taxpayers that see that millions can be saved by enacting a similar law

 
Looking shelter costs in Santa Clara county seems to disprove that statment.
 

ORIGINAL: Bobsk8


Nothing will make pet owners more responsible, just as anything else in society, people have to have a law that tells them what they can and cannot do. Can you imagine doing away with laws on crime, and just teaching people that stealing is wrong and they should be more responsible and not steal.

No more responsible pet owners?  We didnt have pet laws back when breeding started...  Everyone knew "right from wrong" then.  People dont need pet laws, they need education.  Education and laws are totally different.

How many people wear their seat belt?  Isnt it a law to wear it?  I can tell you more than half the people in my family dont.  It cannot be enforced unless you are pulled over for something else, what makes you think they can enforce this?  Again, I find it irrational. 

Instead of complaining about dogs dying in shelters, why dont you **CONTENT WAS PREVIOUSLY REMOVED BY A MODERATOR FOR RUDENESS. PLEASE DO NOT REMOVE YOUR RED INK OR YOU WILL BE SUSPENDED** adopt 10 more dogs...  Just a thought on how to stop overpopulation.  Of course, it is very irrational and cannot be done.  But...  it is sounding a lot better than this bill...  []

ORIGINAL: timsdat

then why are people from as far away as Florida so concerned about it's passage? That seems to be the question that everyone wants to ignore.

We have answered this question over and over again.

Kindly point to the answer with a link, because I don't remember reading it.  Keep in mind that you edited out most of my question in your reply, so I will repost it below in red. 

The real issue  that should be addressed and the question answered that  I asked  the other day and never got an answer is this:
If what all the Anti California AB1634 people say is true, and AB1634 will not work, then why are people from as far away as Florida so concerned about it's passage?  That seems to be the question that everyone wants to ignore. The Anti 1634 groups say it won't do anything to reduce the dog population and without taking a breath, add in the statement that there won't be any dogs and cats left if this law is enacted.  You can't have it both ways, even though you wish you could, because it doesn't make any sense to anyone.

I have my opinion about the answer, and it is that these people know that this law will be very effective and are scared to death that it will spread across the country.  Any group of taxpayers that see that millions can be saved by enacting a similar law, will do exactly that.  There is a group in Georgia that are already talking about it.

Please refer to forum rules here:
http://forum.dog.com/asp/tm.asp?m=297451

Forum rule 3.)     Debating and discussion is fine. We encourage it. It's how we all learn. However, respect your fellow members. Different posters are likely to express different opinions, and while they may differ from yours, everyone is entitled to express theirs freely. We will not tolerate rudeness, insults or personal attacks. Do not disrespect, taunt, bother, bug or flame anyone, either on the forum or via private messages or email.

Moderator, M. Kampa

ORIGINAL: Shadomoon

ORIGINAL: Bobsk8


Nothing will make pet owners more responsible, just as anything else in society, people have to have a law that tells them what they can and cannot do. Can you imagine doing away with laws on crime, and just teaching people that stealing is wrong and they should be more responsible and not steal.

No more responsible pet owners?  We didnt have pet laws back when breeding started...  Everyone knew "right from wrong" then.  People dont need pet laws, they need education.  Education and laws are totally different.

How many people wear their seat belt?  Isnt it a law to wear it?  I can tell you more than half the people in my family dont.  It cannot be enforced unless you are pulled over for something else, what makes you think they can enforce this?  Again, I find it irrational. 

Instead of complaining about dogs dying in shelters, why dont you**Content Removed** adopt 10 more dogs...  Just a thought on how to stop overpopulation.  Of course, it is very irrational and cannot be done.  But...  it is sounding a lot better than this bill...  []

"People in your family don't wear a seatbelt..?" [&:]

"Everyone knew right from wrong when breeding started"

This discussion is rather silly, at this point, so I am not going to argue with you anymore.  I will, however , point out when you post something that is false.  

ORIGINAL: Bobsk8


"People in your family don't wear a seatbelt..?" [&:]

"Everyone knew right from wrong when breeding started"

This discussion is rather silly, at this point, so I am not going to argue with you anymore.  I will, however , point out when you post something that is false.  

 
How can fact in my family and my opinion be false?
 
OT though.  Sorry.

ORIGINAL: DogAdvocat
It does include qualifications that include having a valid breed recognized by an approved registry, having a dog that is used to show or in sporting competition, obedience, agility, etc.

This does not apply to anyone with a breeder's license!!!
 

122336.2.  (a)  A local jurisdiction shall issue an intact permit, as defined in subdivision (a) of Section 122336, if the owner provides sufficient proof, as determined by the local jurisdiction or its authorized local animal control agency, that any of the following conditions are met:
   (1)   ...  breeder license ...
   (2)   The owner's cat or dog is a valid breed  ... 

The key word here is "any".  The requirements for showing are all under category #2.
 
AB1634 allows those with a breeder's license to breed any dog - even mixed breeds.