PAWS
Moderators: Pike Ridge Beagles, Aaron Bartlett
Hey Steve, just got in and see a WHOLE lot of information that you posted that I will read and respond to. wityh a quick browse I saw your question to me on why I support it. So far I can't tell you I do or I don't. All I am saying and reading is that I'm not interpreting things the way many others are.
I see this as nothing more than an educational discussion. I respect that what I posted , you respond to and then reask, it makes me think more on the other side that I am not seeing.
At this point I do think allot of this is mute because the bill is still under review and the wording will change, but as it sits currently, I'm just not getting what you are getting.
Buckshot, I don't know why your post was deleted along with your membership. I will admit, with out knowing all the facts, it does come across as fishy.
I'll respond to your other questions tomorrow. Thanks again for the honest conversation and for keeping this from getting personal. Even if this ends as us agreeing to disagree, I hope we both come away with more than we already know.
Take care
I see this as nothing more than an educational discussion. I respect that what I posted , you respond to and then reask, it makes me think more on the other side that I am not seeing.
At this point I do think allot of this is mute because the bill is still under review and the wording will change, but as it sits currently, I'm just not getting what you are getting.
Buckshot, I don't know why your post was deleted along with your membership. I will admit, with out knowing all the facts, it does come across as fishy.
I'll respond to your other questions tomorrow. Thanks again for the honest conversation and for keeping this from getting personal. Even if this ends as us agreeing to disagree, I hope we both come away with more than we already know.
Take care
“What makes anyone think with the liscensing fees of breeders this will cover all of the added expenses of inspections file keeping court costs court filing costs lawyer fees office supplies in which a whole new department will have to be added and new agents also. If you notice in the above email from a board member of AKC it states that they could contract the inspections out too. That will cost more money alot more.”
Steve, honestly I think this is too much speculation. You nor I nor anyone can say for sure that the fees will not be enough, so until we can see budget outline, we will never be able to agree on this until such time the numbers are in front of us.
As with AKC and inspections it is fact that if AKC wanted to stop puppy mills they could with thier current policies. Yet AKC still lets puppy mills run and register thier dogs with them.
How could 1 registry stop puppy mills, all they can do is stop registering. If I was a puppy mill and the AKC would not register any more dogs from me or my kennel or relatives of mine, what do I do, go out of business? No way, I register with another registry. The largest out here is the ACA, American Canine Association, every pet store and many ads in the paper are ACA registered. For anyone to lay the puppy mill problem on 1 registry seems a bit, well, unfair and unjust.
As far as the $500.00 part of the bill it does not specifically say what those other animals are. It says other animals but not which animals. Specifics in the bill it can be interpreted other animals includes dogs. Think about it other animals and is not specific. It can be interpreted in the fact that humans are animals but yet if they sell any other animals it includes them. they state the problem with the current law is it is so widely interpreted. Also why single out cats and dogs if that is the interpretation shelters are filled with rabbits and ferrets and every other animal out there. You figure rabbits at $10-$20 a piece that is atleast 50 of them. Point being the interpretation is to wide on this part of the bill.
Are you seriously suggesting that the “other” animals could be dogs? In my own small opinion, that’s absurd and the human statement is even more absurd.
As far as the selling your info that is not a derogatory remark it is the truth and everyone knows it is.
No offense, but we are off subject. I’m not interested in discussing marketing strategies of the AKC.
As far as line breeding goes there is no problem with going by the laws but why should I have to pay the government to be able to breed my own dogs. That is crap and we all know it is. I have a big problem with the government controling my hobbies. It is straight in line with communism and we all know it. It is my right to breed my dogs how I see fit as long as I am not endagering the health of my dogs it should not be a problem with any of it. I should not have to have a fee set to pay because I want to breed my hounds. It costs enough money to raise train and hunt these dogs in the first place.
To say that is crap and we all know it. Since I don’t know it, that statement must be false in its entirety. The same goes with the communism statement. As far as it being your right to breed your dogs, you are correct, you do have the right, just as long as you follow the laws and regulations that will be incurred along with it. Steve, I see this just like guns. I don’t want Uncle Sam telling me what guns I can own, but so I can own the gun or guns of my choosing, I have to follow the governments’ regulations. No one is stopping you from breeding your dogs; they are just saying they want you to follow the rules to do so.
As far as the whole breeders pet stores thing that is a load of malarky. Like I said if I help someone sell a dog even if it is not at my house it goes against me (this came from AKC also) Yet if I am a retail pet store I am exempt from it. Hog wash if you ask me. The pet stores will always find breeders to sell to them and can afford to do so. They can open thier own mills if need be and do thier own thing.
That’s okay for you to think it is malarkey. It still boils down to having access to who is selling the dogs to the pet stores. As far as the pet stores opening their own mills, the law still states the pet store must provide the information from where the dog came from. So it will still come down to having them be regulated and registered. As far as the pet stores also finding someone to sell to them, it still goes back to them keeping a record of it, which then can lead the investigators back to that breeder. If it doesn’t follow the guidelines, that breeder will pay the price for it.
I am really missing your point here with the pet store. If only registered regulated breeders are selling to pet stores, isn’t that a good thing.
Should a food manufacturer and a food seller fall under the same regulations. I mean once the food has been packaged, should it still fall under the same rules for when it is being processed. But I add this, if a company processes the food and then sell it in a retail environment; it has to follow both sets of laws. If you breed a dog and do not sell them, you have to follow the laws of how many dogs you can own. If you only sell dogs you will have to follow the rules of just selling. This is to provide the names of where you got the dogs. If you do both, you will have to follow both sets of laws.
As far as wording to be changed you and I might not know about it. Look at alot of gun laws that have been snuck into other bills. there are ways to do it that no one will notice. HSUS said they were experts on this. This bill is said to be added to another one and won't go into the senate or house in this form it will be put into another bill. You figure a 60 page bill with one line in the middle of it will go unnoticed alot easier than it by itself. there has been plenty of amendment go through like this and we all know it.
I agree that many bills have been snuck through by what it is attached to and understand exactly what your point is on this.
On your top associations against it that is a bunch of milarky too. So you are saying that because I am the president of the CHA everyone believes what I do because I say so. That is a poor excuse if you ask me. The whole government in my business thing is milarky too these are top standing breed and state associations that stand for animal rights against this issue. Also out of all the KC's that are out there 1 supports it. I guess these KC's don't want the breeds to be better or anything else right.
Steve, that’s okay too if you want to see this as a poor excuse. But we are both entitled to our point of view of speculation. I shouldn’t have responded to that because we can only do just that, speculate.
This bill is flawed and it is plain to see. This bill regulates the little people. Does nothing about the real problem. This bill is targeted at hobby breeders and DDAL said they are trying to promote a bill to regulate hobby breeders. Because of the interpretation of the current law that hobby breeders fall into the same category as retail pet stores. They have been seeking regulation against hobby breeders and have sued USDA a couple of times because of thier interpretation of the current law. Tell me why HSUS DDAL PETA are for this bill. HSUS said they will try to regulate hunting with hounds a little at a time until it is completely wiped out. Could this be a start. I have a real problem with 3 of the biggest anti groups out there being behind this bill.
Again, I don’t agree that it is plain to see how this is flawed. The last time I sat and thought about, anyone selling more than 6 litters a year is not “little” nor is selling more than 25 dogs little. As far as lawsuits, before I could respond to that I would need to know exactly who sued and what the court reports were. As far as the 3 biggest anti’s backing this, I can see where this causes concern.
I think your final statement is just slippery slope talk. If your breeding program is to benefit your needs and what you believe to be bettering your pack and or breed than why wouldn’t you just follow the laws to do this? I still think anyone breeding more than 6 litters a year should be regulated.
I conclude with this. I think it is impossible to use the AKC or any registry to stop puppy mills, heck, my first thought is anyone having 6 litters a year is a puppy mill, but that’s neither here nor there. Again, people will just change registries and move on. This is why I think it to be important to work with the pet stores to find out where they are getting the dogs. I feel all registries should notify the regulators when someone registers that many litters because I honestly do not think they are doing it to better the breed, but only their pocketbook. As far as your line breeding and planned for yourself breeding, you and those that breed for the same reasons sure enough are not going to breed 6 litters in 12 months.
This is as far as I have gotten. I’ll read and address your other post when I can.
Take care
Goes
PS. Maybe if the Registeries banned folks as fast with their registry as they do with their boards we wouldn't be having this discussion. That is including ALL registries.
Steve, honestly I think this is too much speculation. You nor I nor anyone can say for sure that the fees will not be enough, so until we can see budget outline, we will never be able to agree on this until such time the numbers are in front of us.
As with AKC and inspections it is fact that if AKC wanted to stop puppy mills they could with thier current policies. Yet AKC still lets puppy mills run and register thier dogs with them.
How could 1 registry stop puppy mills, all they can do is stop registering. If I was a puppy mill and the AKC would not register any more dogs from me or my kennel or relatives of mine, what do I do, go out of business? No way, I register with another registry. The largest out here is the ACA, American Canine Association, every pet store and many ads in the paper are ACA registered. For anyone to lay the puppy mill problem on 1 registry seems a bit, well, unfair and unjust.
As far as the $500.00 part of the bill it does not specifically say what those other animals are. It says other animals but not which animals. Specifics in the bill it can be interpreted other animals includes dogs. Think about it other animals and is not specific. It can be interpreted in the fact that humans are animals but yet if they sell any other animals it includes them. they state the problem with the current law is it is so widely interpreted. Also why single out cats and dogs if that is the interpretation shelters are filled with rabbits and ferrets and every other animal out there. You figure rabbits at $10-$20 a piece that is atleast 50 of them. Point being the interpretation is to wide on this part of the bill.
Are you seriously suggesting that the “other” animals could be dogs? In my own small opinion, that’s absurd and the human statement is even more absurd.
As far as the selling your info that is not a derogatory remark it is the truth and everyone knows it is.
No offense, but we are off subject. I’m not interested in discussing marketing strategies of the AKC.
As far as line breeding goes there is no problem with going by the laws but why should I have to pay the government to be able to breed my own dogs. That is crap and we all know it is. I have a big problem with the government controling my hobbies. It is straight in line with communism and we all know it. It is my right to breed my dogs how I see fit as long as I am not endagering the health of my dogs it should not be a problem with any of it. I should not have to have a fee set to pay because I want to breed my hounds. It costs enough money to raise train and hunt these dogs in the first place.
To say that is crap and we all know it. Since I don’t know it, that statement must be false in its entirety. The same goes with the communism statement. As far as it being your right to breed your dogs, you are correct, you do have the right, just as long as you follow the laws and regulations that will be incurred along with it. Steve, I see this just like guns. I don’t want Uncle Sam telling me what guns I can own, but so I can own the gun or guns of my choosing, I have to follow the governments’ regulations. No one is stopping you from breeding your dogs; they are just saying they want you to follow the rules to do so.
As far as the whole breeders pet stores thing that is a load of malarky. Like I said if I help someone sell a dog even if it is not at my house it goes against me (this came from AKC also) Yet if I am a retail pet store I am exempt from it. Hog wash if you ask me. The pet stores will always find breeders to sell to them and can afford to do so. They can open thier own mills if need be and do thier own thing.
That’s okay for you to think it is malarkey. It still boils down to having access to who is selling the dogs to the pet stores. As far as the pet stores opening their own mills, the law still states the pet store must provide the information from where the dog came from. So it will still come down to having them be regulated and registered. As far as the pet stores also finding someone to sell to them, it still goes back to them keeping a record of it, which then can lead the investigators back to that breeder. If it doesn’t follow the guidelines, that breeder will pay the price for it.
I am really missing your point here with the pet store. If only registered regulated breeders are selling to pet stores, isn’t that a good thing.
Should a food manufacturer and a food seller fall under the same regulations. I mean once the food has been packaged, should it still fall under the same rules for when it is being processed. But I add this, if a company processes the food and then sell it in a retail environment; it has to follow both sets of laws. If you breed a dog and do not sell them, you have to follow the laws of how many dogs you can own. If you only sell dogs you will have to follow the rules of just selling. This is to provide the names of where you got the dogs. If you do both, you will have to follow both sets of laws.
As far as wording to be changed you and I might not know about it. Look at alot of gun laws that have been snuck into other bills. there are ways to do it that no one will notice. HSUS said they were experts on this. This bill is said to be added to another one and won't go into the senate or house in this form it will be put into another bill. You figure a 60 page bill with one line in the middle of it will go unnoticed alot easier than it by itself. there has been plenty of amendment go through like this and we all know it.
I agree that many bills have been snuck through by what it is attached to and understand exactly what your point is on this.
On your top associations against it that is a bunch of milarky too. So you are saying that because I am the president of the CHA everyone believes what I do because I say so. That is a poor excuse if you ask me. The whole government in my business thing is milarky too these are top standing breed and state associations that stand for animal rights against this issue. Also out of all the KC's that are out there 1 supports it. I guess these KC's don't want the breeds to be better or anything else right.
Steve, that’s okay too if you want to see this as a poor excuse. But we are both entitled to our point of view of speculation. I shouldn’t have responded to that because we can only do just that, speculate.
This bill is flawed and it is plain to see. This bill regulates the little people. Does nothing about the real problem. This bill is targeted at hobby breeders and DDAL said they are trying to promote a bill to regulate hobby breeders. Because of the interpretation of the current law that hobby breeders fall into the same category as retail pet stores. They have been seeking regulation against hobby breeders and have sued USDA a couple of times because of thier interpretation of the current law. Tell me why HSUS DDAL PETA are for this bill. HSUS said they will try to regulate hunting with hounds a little at a time until it is completely wiped out. Could this be a start. I have a real problem with 3 of the biggest anti groups out there being behind this bill.
Again, I don’t agree that it is plain to see how this is flawed. The last time I sat and thought about, anyone selling more than 6 litters a year is not “little” nor is selling more than 25 dogs little. As far as lawsuits, before I could respond to that I would need to know exactly who sued and what the court reports were. As far as the 3 biggest anti’s backing this, I can see where this causes concern.
I think your final statement is just slippery slope talk. If your breeding program is to benefit your needs and what you believe to be bettering your pack and or breed than why wouldn’t you just follow the laws to do this? I still think anyone breeding more than 6 litters a year should be regulated.
I conclude with this. I think it is impossible to use the AKC or any registry to stop puppy mills, heck, my first thought is anyone having 6 litters a year is a puppy mill, but that’s neither here nor there. Again, people will just change registries and move on. This is why I think it to be important to work with the pet stores to find out where they are getting the dogs. I feel all registries should notify the regulators when someone registers that many litters because I honestly do not think they are doing it to better the breed, but only their pocketbook. As far as your line breeding and planned for yourself breeding, you and those that breed for the same reasons sure enough are not going to breed 6 litters in 12 months.
This is as far as I have gotten. I’ll read and address your other post when I can.
Take care
Goes
PS. Maybe if the Registeries banned folks as fast with their registry as they do with their boards we wouldn't be having this discussion. That is including ALL registries.
As far as the bill it states over 6 litters or 25 pups. With my coonhounds and beagles 3 litters would cover my 25. I keep 2 to see how they will turn out and if one of them turns out to my liking I keep it and get rid of the other one. The bill specifically states or not which ever is greater. This will knock out alot of other people also. take for instances coonhounds there are alot of co owned dogs. If me and one of my partners decide to breed a female then that goes against me too. No matter if the pups are raised in my kennel or not. If I sell my half of the dog not sure which half I got though lol it goes against me. I also know alot of hunters are not overflowing with money alot cannot afford the liscensing fee. So what is one supposed to do stop what they love.
As far as the puppy mills if the registry feels so strongly on the issue then yes they can stop it inside thier registry and not allow it. This part is common sense. AKC can stop all registration on puppy mills in thier registry if they wanted to they could stop all registry on imported dogs also. AKC is a non profit organization So the big dollar sign of over 64 million last year can be reduced some. Yes an AKC director told me they made after everything was paid over 64 million. So what is the big deal with loosing alittle in the long run to better thier registration program.
AKC has faught this type of legislation for a long time and now they go with one that is pretty much the same as what they have been fighting with DDAL and HSUS on for years. Now they want to join together and sponsor a bill that is exactly what they have faught against for years. Sponsering with the three biggest anti groups of all. That are known for saying they want to do away with all hound hunting and will start little and work thier way up. They stated they are professionals and have plenty of experiance in writting these types of bills. Ever heard the saying keep your friends close and your enemies closer. Maybe these organizations are duping AKC to believe it is something that it is not. I know it is speculation but just think about it for awhile.
As far as the guns issue no one will take my guns away from me with out a fight first. That is my right I collect guns some never been used. So will I go on that legislation either no I want. Just like I don't bear hunt but I will stick up for thier rights just the same as mine because we are all in the same boat. The more we join together to stop these kinds of legislations the better off we are from the ability for other thing happening as a result of a bill that to some is a small thing.
As far as the fees not covering the inspections and everything else it doesn't take much to realize that. by the time the USDA opens up regional offices or state offices for this division supplies them with the office supplies that are needed the paperwork and the little office things also pays saleries Buys vehicles for the inspections. Pays for court filings lawyer fees court costs and even lawsuits from this. It will not add up to the fees unless they are so ungodly high that noone can afford. This is more common sense than anything. look at the budget for the USDA now this is government funded grants not including the liscenses that are already needed for certain things they have to cover and I am sure they will go inspect kennels that are not liscensed also.
On the other animals deal it is a total interpretation. Just like what AKC and the antis say is wrong with the current bill. it does not specifically list what other animals are listed just like I have seen that AKC says that outside of the other animals part livestock is not included Where in the part about 25 dogs or cats or more than 6 litters does it say anything about livestock . it doesn't but yet AKC has interpreted that livestock is not included in the other animals part of the bill. Also speaking of livestock if these animals are in the regulation also (as from AKC) then what is that going to do to the price of meat, wool, eggs, milk or anything else that comes from livestock drive the prices up.
I have a problem with rules telling me how many dogs I can breed or sell. I don't have a problem with laws on how the animals should be kept. You know as well as I do that we have seen someone that has 2 dogs kept in worse condition than someone that has 20. This bill is not just to regulate breeding it is to regulate you selling your dogs also. As everyone knows hunters sell quit a few dogs because what might not suit me suits you and vise versa
As far as the pet stores go it is different because they have alittle more cash to put out than the rest of us. They bring in millions a year where to you and me it is just a hobby and rarely see any profit off the sale of dogs or pups. I don't know about you but I can't recall the last time I made money off of pups or dogs.
As far as inspections go on this bill Santorum and the other sponsors said they it could be contracted out. Who do you think will get the contracts maybe HSUS, DDAL or PETA. They could and have thier own agenda also. Notice I did say they could and by sponsoring this bill most likely would. Alot of towns have given HSUS the ability to take a dog off of a premises with out any documentation because the y think it is ok to do so and better for the animal.
I will answer the rest and whatever else you have later take care
As far as the puppy mills if the registry feels so strongly on the issue then yes they can stop it inside thier registry and not allow it. This part is common sense. AKC can stop all registration on puppy mills in thier registry if they wanted to they could stop all registry on imported dogs also. AKC is a non profit organization So the big dollar sign of over 64 million last year can be reduced some. Yes an AKC director told me they made after everything was paid over 64 million. So what is the big deal with loosing alittle in the long run to better thier registration program.
AKC has faught this type of legislation for a long time and now they go with one that is pretty much the same as what they have been fighting with DDAL and HSUS on for years. Now they want to join together and sponsor a bill that is exactly what they have faught against for years. Sponsering with the three biggest anti groups of all. That are known for saying they want to do away with all hound hunting and will start little and work thier way up. They stated they are professionals and have plenty of experiance in writting these types of bills. Ever heard the saying keep your friends close and your enemies closer. Maybe these organizations are duping AKC to believe it is something that it is not. I know it is speculation but just think about it for awhile.
As far as the guns issue no one will take my guns away from me with out a fight first. That is my right I collect guns some never been used. So will I go on that legislation either no I want. Just like I don't bear hunt but I will stick up for thier rights just the same as mine because we are all in the same boat. The more we join together to stop these kinds of legislations the better off we are from the ability for other thing happening as a result of a bill that to some is a small thing.
As far as the fees not covering the inspections and everything else it doesn't take much to realize that. by the time the USDA opens up regional offices or state offices for this division supplies them with the office supplies that are needed the paperwork and the little office things also pays saleries Buys vehicles for the inspections. Pays for court filings lawyer fees court costs and even lawsuits from this. It will not add up to the fees unless they are so ungodly high that noone can afford. This is more common sense than anything. look at the budget for the USDA now this is government funded grants not including the liscenses that are already needed for certain things they have to cover and I am sure they will go inspect kennels that are not liscensed also.
On the other animals deal it is a total interpretation. Just like what AKC and the antis say is wrong with the current bill. it does not specifically list what other animals are listed just like I have seen that AKC says that outside of the other animals part livestock is not included Where in the part about 25 dogs or cats or more than 6 litters does it say anything about livestock . it doesn't but yet AKC has interpreted that livestock is not included in the other animals part of the bill. Also speaking of livestock if these animals are in the regulation also (as from AKC) then what is that going to do to the price of meat, wool, eggs, milk or anything else that comes from livestock drive the prices up.
I have a problem with rules telling me how many dogs I can breed or sell. I don't have a problem with laws on how the animals should be kept. You know as well as I do that we have seen someone that has 2 dogs kept in worse condition than someone that has 20. This bill is not just to regulate breeding it is to regulate you selling your dogs also. As everyone knows hunters sell quit a few dogs because what might not suit me suits you and vise versa
As far as the pet stores go it is different because they have alittle more cash to put out than the rest of us. They bring in millions a year where to you and me it is just a hobby and rarely see any profit off the sale of dogs or pups. I don't know about you but I can't recall the last time I made money off of pups or dogs.
As far as inspections go on this bill Santorum and the other sponsors said they it could be contracted out. Who do you think will get the contracts maybe HSUS, DDAL or PETA. They could and have thier own agenda also. Notice I did say they could and by sponsoring this bill most likely would. Alot of towns have given HSUS the ability to take a dog off of a premises with out any documentation because the y think it is ok to do so and better for the animal.
I will answer the rest and whatever else you have later take care
1st off it does not state 6 litters or 25 dogs. It states
`(I)(aa) sells not more than 25 dogs or cats at wholesale or to the public; or
`(bb) does not whelp more than 6 litters of dogs or cats and sells only dogs or cats bred or raised on the premises of the person directly at retail to persons who purchase such animals for their own use and enjoyment and not for resale;
It does number limit the number of pups/kittens from a litter. That is preposterous. That would be impossible to do. You could have 2 litters and break the 25 number. That why is it is SPECIFIC in its wording “or”. I have seen this on so many websites that it is amazing how folks could fall into this scare tactic by the opposition. It says what is says, no interpretation needed.
As for people not being able to afford to be able to do what they love and what should they do. All I can say is I love to take cars that are about 10 years or so old and buy them cheap, then clean them, buff out the paint, add a view accessories, then resell them for 2 times what I paid. But I can’t sell more than 6 without having a dealers license. What if by march I have sold 6, according your line of thinking that since I love it so much that it should be okay for me to continue selling them regardless of the law. NO!!! I couldn’t do that. I would need to just stop until the following year or GET A DEALER LICENSE. Even if I co-owned the cars! It’s still the law, isn’t it?
I concur about the AKC being able to do more but again I am not going to go into detail over one registry.
As far as the gun issue. We do agree and as far as fighting for ALL hunters rights, I agree 100%, but this bill has absolutely nothing to do with your hunting rights, not even 1%, so I do think you are using the Slippery Slope again. But again, this speculation and I’ll leave that one alone.
Fees. I figure this much, we just aren’t going to be able to agree on this, but I would love to see a budget proposal defining this.
Other animals. Again we see it differently and yes, I would like to see it spelled out, "other animals do not include dogs/cats” would take care of that.
As far as profit from dogs. I make a profit every year. I have posted before on my business plan. I think over the hunting season what dogs that I want to breed and keep or get rid of. I say, okay I want to go into the new year with 8 dogs. Each dog eats “X” amount of food which costs “X” amount of dollars. I then budget $100 a dog for shots or meds that may come up. I add licensing fees (HINT HINT…lol), advertising costs then I add it all up. That comes to “X” dollars. And if pups are selling for “X” dollars, I would only need to sell somewhere close to “X” pups. This way I can keep what I want and get rid of what I want and my wife doesn’t complain about them except when I don’t clean the kennel for a day and it starts to stink…lol And I at least cover my costs to keep them. I admit it was harder to do back east than it is out here in NW, Beagles sell for a minimum of $350 a pup and up to $1000 plus. But you get my point, if you plan ahead, you can still accomplish what you want.
As far as the inspectors go. I would like to see that in the bill prior to it passing.
I think bottom line is no one will ever be 100% in agreement with the wording and I am in favor of limiting the amount of dogs/cats being sold and being whelped. Places like Hunte Corporation and Neilson Farms and Pretty Penny Kennels and what many of the Amish plus countless other mills/farms are doing are reasons we are going through this right now.
Take care Steve
`(I)(aa) sells not more than 25 dogs or cats at wholesale or to the public; or
`(bb) does not whelp more than 6 litters of dogs or cats and sells only dogs or cats bred or raised on the premises of the person directly at retail to persons who purchase such animals for their own use and enjoyment and not for resale;
It does number limit the number of pups/kittens from a litter. That is preposterous. That would be impossible to do. You could have 2 litters and break the 25 number. That why is it is SPECIFIC in its wording “or”. I have seen this on so many websites that it is amazing how folks could fall into this scare tactic by the opposition. It says what is says, no interpretation needed.
As for people not being able to afford to be able to do what they love and what should they do. All I can say is I love to take cars that are about 10 years or so old and buy them cheap, then clean them, buff out the paint, add a view accessories, then resell them for 2 times what I paid. But I can’t sell more than 6 without having a dealers license. What if by march I have sold 6, according your line of thinking that since I love it so much that it should be okay for me to continue selling them regardless of the law. NO!!! I couldn’t do that. I would need to just stop until the following year or GET A DEALER LICENSE. Even if I co-owned the cars! It’s still the law, isn’t it?
I concur about the AKC being able to do more but again I am not going to go into detail over one registry.
As far as the gun issue. We do agree and as far as fighting for ALL hunters rights, I agree 100%, but this bill has absolutely nothing to do with your hunting rights, not even 1%, so I do think you are using the Slippery Slope again. But again, this speculation and I’ll leave that one alone.
Fees. I figure this much, we just aren’t going to be able to agree on this, but I would love to see a budget proposal defining this.
Other animals. Again we see it differently and yes, I would like to see it spelled out, "other animals do not include dogs/cats” would take care of that.
As far as profit from dogs. I make a profit every year. I have posted before on my business plan. I think over the hunting season what dogs that I want to breed and keep or get rid of. I say, okay I want to go into the new year with 8 dogs. Each dog eats “X” amount of food which costs “X” amount of dollars. I then budget $100 a dog for shots or meds that may come up. I add licensing fees (HINT HINT…lol), advertising costs then I add it all up. That comes to “X” dollars. And if pups are selling for “X” dollars, I would only need to sell somewhere close to “X” pups. This way I can keep what I want and get rid of what I want and my wife doesn’t complain about them except when I don’t clean the kennel for a day and it starts to stink…lol And I at least cover my costs to keep them. I admit it was harder to do back east than it is out here in NW, Beagles sell for a minimum of $350 a pup and up to $1000 plus. But you get my point, if you plan ahead, you can still accomplish what you want.
As far as the inspectors go. I would like to see that in the bill prior to it passing.
I think bottom line is no one will ever be 100% in agreement with the wording and I am in favor of limiting the amount of dogs/cats being sold and being whelped. Places like Hunte Corporation and Neilson Farms and Pretty Penny Kennels and what many of the Amish plus countless other mills/farms are doing are reasons we are going through this right now.
Take care Steve
-
bootlegger
- Posts: 15
- Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2005 7:33 pm
- Location: Water Valley, MS
- Contact:
Can anyone say IRS.
Also on the 25 what if I breed 2 of my beagles then one of my coon hounds or decide to breed 1 of my beagles, 1 of my Labs, 1 of my coon dogs, it averages less than 9 pups a litter to go over 25, now I am a puppy mill even if I sell the pups for cost. JMO
Also on the 25 what if I breed 2 of my beagles then one of my coon hounds or decide to breed 1 of my beagles, 1 of my Labs, 1 of my coon dogs, it averages less than 9 pups a litter to go over 25, now I am a puppy mill even if I sell the pups for cost. JMO
Good dogs, Good races, must be heaven. John Massie
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/handicappedhunters/
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/handicappedhunters/
Anything and I mean anything that the Anti's support cannot be good for anyone or thing. The AKC is not supporting the sportsman or sporting dogs. The AKC is in bed with the ANTI'S on this one,this should tell the die hard AKC only folks something about them as a registery. They are trying to kill the sporting hound at the source,by limiteing the small breeder,the one who actuly breeds hunting hounds. This bill may sound good but its a pralude to bigger and better things for the anties. I may sound paranoid but a little paranoya may save our rights. Steve Fielder is no Houndsman and should be ashamed to support such a bill,and so should the AKC or any so called houndsman. This one should realy get registration numbers up,NOT!!! Get rid of the for sale sections of these boards the'll be watching,make up a phone list.
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch.
Liberty is a well armed lamb contesting the vote. "Benjamin Franklin" 1759
Liberty is a well armed lamb contesting the vote. "Benjamin Franklin" 1759
-
WrongsideRandy
- Posts: 705
- Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2005 9:02 pm
- Location: Danville, IN
I have been into hunting and fishing my entire life, and I hunt just like the next man/lady......but some of the things I have seen done to/with animals and the way some people care for beagles, and other animals in general.....I can honestly see why ASPCA, PETA, HSUS and the rest are doing well and I hope they continue to stick the losers who dont care for animals they own in jail. I have no problem with a man fighting pit bulls going to jail.....NONE! I have no shame in seeing a good family man who owns a puppy mill going to jail for not feeding, watering or providing medical care to dogs. Send them to jail...I dont care and I appalud them doing so.
Some people are idiots. They bring it on themselves and dont have enough sense to know it. Yuppies are everywhere! Everyone is good at pointing fingers........and preaching how others should act and behave, but they have a closet full of there own problems.
And to think......some say America is land of the free and home of the brave, lmao...nothing is free now days and everyone is scared of speaking the truth for fear of offending someone, nothing too brave about that, is there?
Go figure!! Only in America baby!!!
Peace
Randy
Some people are idiots. They bring it on themselves and dont have enough sense to know it. Yuppies are everywhere! Everyone is good at pointing fingers........and preaching how others should act and behave, but they have a closet full of there own problems.
And to think......some say America is land of the free and home of the brave, lmao...nothing is free now days and everyone is scared of speaking the truth for fear of offending someone, nothing too brave about that, is there?
Go figure!! Only in America baby!!!
Peace
Randy
Bootlegger - it is not 25 puppies it is 25 dogs or whelp 6 litters So you are safe.
tommyg - Steve is NOT for the bill. He is against. I have been making the pro comments and he has been making the con.....lol comments
So I guess you should be ashamed for making such a statement
Should I be ashamed of myself for thinking of supporting this bill?
As far as anything the anti's ars supporting can't be good. Well they are supporting the closure of all puppy mills and breeding farms. Is that not good?
The pralude to bigger and better things. That's the ole SLIPPERY SLOPE MENTALITY that we have to try get away from. We have to find support or opposition based on what the laws are now. Not what could happen, or play the what if's.
wrongside randy...AMEN!!!! I can't say for sure yet if I believe this bill will amke that big of a change but I can say that something needs to be done and this open form of communication and thought might, just might lead to the answer.
Goes
tommyg - Steve is NOT for the bill. He is against. I have been making the pro comments and he has been making the con.....lol comments
So I guess you should be ashamed for making such a statement
Should I be ashamed of myself for thinking of supporting this bill?
As far as anything the anti's ars supporting can't be good. Well they are supporting the closure of all puppy mills and breeding farms. Is that not good?
The pralude to bigger and better things. That's the ole SLIPPERY SLOPE MENTALITY that we have to try get away from. We have to find support or opposition based on what the laws are now. Not what could happen, or play the what if's.
wrongside randy...AMEN!!!! I can't say for sure yet if I believe this bill will amke that big of a change but I can say that something needs to be done and this open form of communication and thought might, just might lead to the answer.
Goes
I still think you're and the bill are dead wrong. Do you think this will stop puppy mills,they have a market for there hounds. Its going to hurt the small breeder. I won't be getting away from my SLIPPERY SLOPE MENTALITY,I'm not liberal. If you don't try to think ahead then you'll never be able to fight effectively. Give the ANTI'S your support on this one and the'll find you supporting them on other issues that sounds good. You need to worry about the hounds you breed and not worry about what someone else does. The ANTIS are smart they will divide us and then get what they want. Boo on anyone who supports them in anyway. Randy PETA is looking for new members,if you like what they do join em.
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch.
Liberty is a well armed lamb contesting the vote. "Benjamin Franklin" 1759
Liberty is a well armed lamb contesting the vote. "Benjamin Franklin" 1759
-
Buckshot101
- Posts: 345
- Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2005 8:50 pm
- Location: North Alabama
- Contact:
Goes1 Tommy did say the right Steve that is for the Bill
Steve Fielder is for this BillSteve Fielder is no Houndsman and should be ashamed to support such a bill,and so should the AKC or any so called houndsman.
steve3662 is against the Billtommyg - Steve is NOT for the bill.
Visit us on the web at:
http://www.CoonDawgs.com
http://www.AmericanHoundsmen.com
http://www.CoonDogCemetery.com
http://www.HuntingBassets.com
Phone [615] 216-5650
http://www.CoonDawgs.com
http://www.AmericanHoundsmen.com
http://www.CoonDogCemetery.com
http://www.HuntingBassets.com
Phone [615] 216-5650
Goes the bill says or in between those two sub sections. It doesn't ever say which ever one is higher right. So that gives it an interpretation that can be made as which ever one is first.
As far as your car thing goes well that is a totally different subject. Because a you make 2 times as much money off of them as I don't know hardly anyone that makes a profit off of hunting dogs. I personally breed for me a pup. Do you do this for you a car or just to make profit. 2 totally different issues there.
As far as the budget on it we will probably never see it until the bill goes through the votes and if it is passed from what I see the people were not represented. Because I have seen far more against it than for. I hope it does not get passed.
And for everyone else I oppose this bill
I am Steve Jarrell and I approve this message
As far as your car thing goes well that is a totally different subject. Because a you make 2 times as much money off of them as I don't know hardly anyone that makes a profit off of hunting dogs. I personally breed for me a pup. Do you do this for you a car or just to make profit. 2 totally different issues there.
As far as the budget on it we will probably never see it until the bill goes through the votes and if it is passed from what I see the people were not represented. Because I have seen far more against it than for. I hope it does not get passed.
And for everyone else I oppose this bill
I am Steve Jarrell and I approve this message