Tennessee & all Beaglers,Read & email or Congressman

[LR Patch]

Maryland Dog Breeding Bill Hearing Feb 18


Florida Spay/Neuter Mandate Assigned Committee,

Oregon And Tennessee Face Breeding Restrictions,

And Texas Faces Outdoor Kenneling Prohibitions



by JOHN YATES

American Sporting Dog Alliance

http://www.americansportingdogalliance.org

asda@conline.net



This article is archived at: http://eaglerock814.proboards107.com/in ... &thread=22



Animal rights legislation from the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) playbook is aimed at dog owners in five more states:



Maryland legislation makes dog breeding law violations into criminal cases, and sets a 10-dog limit before commercial kennel regulations apply. A House hearing has been set for February 18.


A universal spay and neuter mandate for dogs in Florida has been assigned to a House committee for study and possible hearings.


Oregon and Tennessee dog owners face strict limits on dog ownership and most hobby breeders would be regulated as commercial kennels.


And outdoor and ranch housing for dogs would be effectively banned in Texas.


Please read below for a detailed report for each of these states.



Maryland


New Maryland legislation takes the dangerous step of including dog breeding in the criminal code, and snags up anyone who owns or possesses 10 or more intact dogs over age four months in the requirements for housing, care and exercise.



A hearing has been set on this legislation before the Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee on February 18 at 1 p.m.



Senate Bill 318, sponsored by Senators Lisa Gladden (District 41), George Della (District 46), Richard Madaleno (District 18), and Norman Stone (District 6) prohibits anyone in Maryland from owning, controlling or having custody and charge of more than 50 dogs that have not been spayed or neutered. Violation of this provision would be a criminal offense.



While that provision will affect hunt clubs and some professional trainers or handlers, the bill’s greatest impact will be on people who raise dogs as a hobby.



For anyone who owns, controls or possesses 10 or more sexually intact dogs over the age of four months, SB 318 imposes rules for dog housing, care and exercising in the criminal code. However, the legislation does not specify who will enforce this provision or make inspections, or how a kennel owner can prove compliance.



A “breeding dog” is defined as any dog that is sexually intact and older than four months. This definition includes all field trial, show and competition dogs in this age category, and also many hunting, herding, farm and companion dogs, even though they are not used for breeding, or may be only bred once in their lifetimes.



The American Sporting Dog Alliance sees this as a step to include all intact dogs in a commercial breeding category to impose much more stringent regulations. In the Maryland bill, however, it takes it a step further by criminalizing the breeding of dogs, even on a hobby level.



The housing and space requirements are minimal, although they might be construed to prohibit the common practice of having household dogs sleep in crates, or using crates for housebreaking.



But the exercise requirements are vague, in that they require every dog to be removed from its “primary enclosure” for two hours of exercise a day at a walking pace. “Primary enclosure” is not defined, but in many states it means a dog’s entire kennel run and, for dogs kept in a home, the entire part of the house that is accessible to a dog.



The legislation provides no means for a dog owner to prove that exercise requirements are being met, if challenged by an animal control officer, animal cruelty police officer or policeman. No standards of proof are specified.



Violations would be classified as misdemeanors under the criminal code, subject to a fine of up to $1,000.



Here is a link to the text of the legislation: http://mlis.state.md.us/2009rs/bills/sb/sb0318f.pdf .



SB 318 has been sent to the Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee, 2 East, Miller Senate Building, Annapolis, MD 21401 (410-841-3623 Annapolis/Baltimore or 301-858-3623 Washington, D.C.).



Here are the committee members. Chair: Sen. Brian E. Frosh, Vice Chair: Sen. Lisa A. Gladden, and Senators James Brochin, C. Anthony Muse, Jennie M. Forehand, Jamie Raskin, Larry E. Haines, Bryan W. Simonaire, Nancy Jacobs, Norman R. Stone, Jr. and Alexander X. Mooney. The committee staff members are Susan H. Russell and Shirleen M. Pilgrim, Dept. of Legislative Services, Telephone: 410-946-5510/5350 or 301-970-5510/5350. The assistant to the Chair is Lynn Hudson.



The American Sporting Dog Alliance is asking all Maryland dog owners to contact the members of this committee before the February 18 hearing. Please object strongly to this intrusive and potentially dangerous legislation, and ask the senators to vote against it. Please note that Sen. Gladden and Sen. Stone, who sit on this committee, are sponsors of the legislation.



The link to each senator’s email address requires scrolling down alphabetically to the correct name: http://mlis.state.md.us/mgaweb/mail32.aspx. The legislature’s website provides no other contact information.





FLORIDA



Almost every dog and cat in Florida would have to be spayed or neutered under the terms of House Bill 451, which was assigned to the House Agriculture and Natural Resources Policy Committee this past Friday. Thus far, the committee has not scheduled any meetings or hearings about this legislation, but it is expected to move fairly quickly.



HB 451 mandates that spaying or neutering would have to be done within 30 days of an animal reaching four months of age, which is an age that much recent research has shown may be medically dangerous.



The only exceptions would be for severe medical risks, or if a municipality passes an ordinance that allows dogs that are registered with an approved registry to be licensed as a show animal, an animal actively engaged in competition, a guide dog, or a dog used by police officers or the military. Certain registries, such as Field Dog Stud Book, have not been approved in any place that has mandatory spay/neuter laws.



No dog or cat could be bred in Florida, except by virtue of a county ordinance allowing the sale of a breeding permit. In the absence of a county ordinance, no one could breed a dog or cat in Florida.



However, the legislation also allows counties to impose more strict ordinances, and even to ban all dog breeding outright.



Stiff fines are provided for people who do not sterilize their dogs, and a third offense becomes a misdemeanor charge with possible jail time.



The preamble to the bill, which describes the reason for it, is based on several faulty or inaccurate presumptions. None of the stated reasons have been documented, and much research contradicts several of them.



Florida’s legislative session officially begins in March, but some committees already have begun to hold meetings. HB 451 was introduced by Rep. Scott Randolph, D-Orange County.



Here is a link to the actual legislation: http://www.myfloridahouse.gov/Sections/ ... ssion=2009.



We urge Florida dog and cat owners to contact members of this committee and ask them to oppose HB 451. Please remind them that several national polls by mainstream publications have shown strong opposition to spay and neuter mandates. For example, a poll last summer by Parade Magazine showed that 90-percent of the 55,249 people who responded were opposed to it.



Here is a link to contact information for members of the committee: http://www.myfloridahouse.gov/Sections/ ... teeId=2470.



We also urge all Floridians to contact their own legislator and express your opposition to this legislation. Here is a link page for each legislator’s contact information: http://www.myfloridahouse.gov/Sections/ ... tives.aspx.



Please note that email links are not provided on the website. However, you can send an email by using a legislator’s first and last name, such as in this example: john.doe@myfloridahouse.gov.



This link will allow you to track the legislation: http://www.myfloridahouse.gov/Sections/ ... ssionId=61.



Oregon


Oregon House Bill 2470 would:



Prohibit anyone from owning, possessing, controlling or having charge of more than 25 sexually intact dogs over the age of four months. This requirement would destroy the life work of many dedicated hobby breeders, and drive almost every professional handler, trainer and boarding kennel operator out of business.


Require anyone who owns, possesses, controls or has charge of 10 or more sexually intact dogs over four months of age to follow standards of care designed for commercial breeding kennels. These include removing a dog from its kennel twice a day for two hours of exercise.


Define anyone who raises three litters of puppies a year, or sells more than 20 dogs or puppies a year, as a pet dealer. Kennel owners who are classified as pet dealers (which includes the majority of serious hobbyists) must provide veterinary examinations of every dog or puppy that is sold. In addition, the legislation provides a series of complex documentation and disclosures to buyers for every dog or puppy that is sold.


Create a “lemon law” offering complex legal protections to anyone who buys a dog or puppy, for 30 days after the sale, if the dog is diagnosed with a disease, illness or condition that a veterinarian certifies is likely to have been contacted before the sale. Hereditary conditions (which are not defined) are covered for two years after the sale. The guarantees include replacing the dog, refunding money, and paying for the costs of veterinary care, legal fees or burial.


Require records to be kept on every dog for at least one year, posting notices about the rights of the buyer, and providing the buyer with a written statement of his or her rights.


And provide criminal charges of a Class B Misdemeanor, which carries penalties of fines up to $2,500 and imprisonment for up to six months.


Here is a link to the text of HB 2470: http://landru.leg.state.or.us/09reg/mea ... intro.html.



HB 2470 is sponsored by Representatives Paul Holvey and Sara Gelser, and Senators Peter Courtney and Vicki Walker. It is cosponsored by Reps. Peter Buckley, Jean Cowan, Larry Galizio, Garrard (not listed on website, first name not available), Greg Matthews, Mike Schaufler and Brad Witt, and Sen. Floyd Prozanski.



The American Sporting Dog Alliance is urging all Oregon dog owners to contact sponsors and cosponsors of HB 2470 and ask them to withdraw the bill and/or withdraw their support of it. We also are asking Oregonians to contact their own senators and representatives to voice strong opposition.



In addition, please contact the members of the Consumer Protection Committee, which received the bill on Feb. 3 and must vote on it before it advances for consideration (committee hearings are likely but have not yet been announced). The members are: Rep. Paul Holvey, Chair; Rep. Chuck Riley, Vice-Chair; Rep. Jim Weidner, Vice-Chair; and Reps. Brent Barton, Jean Cowan, Vic Gilliam, Wayne Krieger, Greg Matthews, Carolyn Tomei and Matt Wingard.



This link gives the names of all representatives (click on a name or scroll down to find contact information): http://www.leg.state.or.us/house/. This is the contact link for the senators: http://www.leg.state.or.us/senate/.



Tennessee


House Bill 386, sponsored by Rep. Janis Baird Sontany (D-53), and its companion legislation, Senate Bill 258, sponsored by Sen. Doug Jackson (D-25), would place the hobby breeding of purebred dogs under criminal animal cruelty statutes and set severe limits on dog ownership. These bills were introduced Monday, Feb. 9, 2009.



While this legislation is called the “Commercial Breeder Act,” in reality it ensnares many hobbyists, trainers and handlers in their net. These bills are typical of HSUS-promoted legislation, which misrepresents its true purpose.



The legislation defines a “commercial breeder” as “any person who possesses or

maintains twenty (20) or more adult female dogs in whole or in part for the

purpose of the sale of their offspring as companion animals.” The words “in part” means that breeding even one female makes a kennel owner a commercial breeder, and the inclusion of the words “possesses or maintains” entraps many professional trainers, handlers, private rescue networks, hound pack owners, boarding kennels and hunt clubs in the definition.



Here are some of the provisions:



Anyone who meets the definition of a commercial breeder must be licensed and inspected, and comply with complex regulations for the care and housing of dogs. License fees will be costly - $500 annually for up to 40 dogs, $1,000 annually for more.


No one can own more than 75 dogs. This includes partnerships, companies and corporations, as well as individuals.


A dog or cat cannot be euthanized, except by a licensed veterinarian. This provision will cause great suffering in severely injured or ill dogs when a veterinarian cannot be located.


To be eligible for a license, state officials must investigate and pass judgment on a person’s “character,” and also on the suitability of the kennel’s location.


Licenses can be suspended or revoked for several reasons. A hearing is provided only through the Department of Agriculture, not to the courts.


State inspectors have unlimited access to the home, facilities and property of anyone who owns a licensed kennel, or an unlicensed kennel. Constitutional requirements for search warrants and probable cause would be trampled.


The state would be given unlimited power to confiscate animals from noncompliant kennels, and could enter into cooperative agreements with local, statewide or national animals rights groups such as HSUS. The kennel owner would have to post a bond to cover the cost. Real estate and personal property could be required as security for the bond.


Civil penalties of up to $1,000 each would multiply for every offense, and no limit would be placed on the total of accumulated citations and penalties for each dog or situation involved.


Please read this legislation for yourself: http://www.capitol.tn.gov/Bills/106/Bill/HB0386.pdf.



This legislation has been introduced, but has not yet been assigned to a committee.



However, we are urging Tennessee dog owners to contact their own legislator and senator as ask them to oppose all aspects of this dangerous legislation.



Here are links for representatives contact information (email addresses on far right): http://www.capitol.tn.gov/house/members/. Here is the list for the senators: http://www.capitol.tn.gov/senate/members/.



Texas


Senate Bill 634 was introduced February 2 by Sen. Kel Seliger (R-Amarillo). A committee assignment has not yet been made. Thus far, no cosponsors are recorded for the legislation.



The legislation says that a dog may not be kept outdoors:



In an enclosure of less that 150 square feet for every dog older than age six months. This definition would be met by a kennel that is 10-feet wide and 15-feet long. This size of kennel would be appropriate for a great Dane, but absurd for a Chihuahua. Owners of smaller dogs, including hunting breeds such as beagles, basset hounds and working terriers, would be very unfairly penalized. Many dog owners would have to tear down and replace existing kennel structures that are well constructed and completely meet the needs of their dogs. Individual costs of compliance easily could be several thousand dollars, at a minimum. However, hot or cold weather would invalidate this kind of housing.


If the air temperature with wind chill factored in falls below 32 degrees, or if a heat advisory has been issued. The bill fails to consider that acclimatization to weather extremes is essential for the health and safety of hunting dogs, herding dogs and other working dogs. These dogs must work in all kinds of weather. If they are not used to severe weather, their lives are endangered. It also ignores the fact that a shaded and breezy outdoor location often is the safest place to keep a dog in hot weather, and people are not required to live in air-conditioned homes. Indoor housing in such conditions is dangerous. Protection from the wind is essential in cold weather, but many kennels offer complete protection from cold weather in an outdoor situation through good housing, windbreaks and other methods.


Or on a “restraint.” This term is not defined in the legislation, but it appears to prohibit anyone from keeping a dog on a tether or chain. Experienced dog people know that tethering provides a dog with the highest possible degree of freedom and safety if it is done correctly. It also provides dogs with the most frequent interaction with people, as contact is unobstructed by kennel fencing. In addition, the only research done on the effects of tethering shows that there are no observable changes in behavior if tethering is used (a 2002 study by Cornell University).


Traditional non-confined farm and ranch housing of herding and working dogs also would appear to be prohibited, and leaving a farm, ranch, herding or livestock protection dog outdoors unattended without restraint would not be allowed. This also would appear to apply to dogs that are used to guard livestock from predators or fenced private property from intruders.



Another apparent prohibition would be housing dogs in dog boxes mounted in or on pick-up trucks, horse trailers or dog trailers when their owner is traveling. These “on-the-road” housing methods are frequently used by many people who travel with dogs, or people who participate in hunting, field trials, dog shows and other events.



And a separate requirement for a dog to be under “immediate” control while on a leash would appear to prohibit training on a checkcord, or using retractable leashes to give a dog more freedom of movement.



Here is a link to this legislation: http://www.legis.state.tx.us/tlodocs/81 ... 00634I.doc.



The American Sporting Dog Alliance is asking Texans to contact Sen. Seliger and ask him to withdraw this dangerous legislation. His email is kel.seliger@senate.state.tx.us. His capitol phone is (512) 463-0131 and his fax is (512) 475-3733. This page will give contact information for his district offices: http://www.txdirectory.com/online/perso ... fice=16684.



We also are asking Texans to contact their own senator and representative to express opposition to SB 634. Here is a link for all senators: http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/Members/ ... ?Chamber=S. This link is for members of the House of Representatives: http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/Members/ ... ?Chamber=H.



The American Sporting Dog Alliance represents owners, breeders and professionals who work with breeds of dogs that are used for hunting. We also welcome people who work with other breeds, as legislative issues affect all of us. We are a grassroots movement working to protect the rights of dog owners, and to assure that the traditional relationships between dogs and humans maintains its rightful place in American society and life.



The American Sporting Dog Alliance also needs your help so that we can continue to work to protect the rights of dog owners. Your membership, participation and support are truly essential to the success of our mission. We are funded solely by your donations in order to maintain strict independence.



Please visit us on the web at http://www.americansportingdogalliance.org . Our email is asda@csonline.net .



PLEASE CROSS-POST AND FORWARD THIS REPORT TO YOUR FRIENDS


The American Sporting Dog Alliance
http://www.americansportingdogalliance.org
Please Join Us

[LR Patch]

Well my state sentator replied to my email saying he would not support this bill & state rep. called the house today also saying he would not support such a stupid bill , I've know him on a personal level for about 30 years. I hope others have called or emailed the reps on this junk , we need to stick together and stop these kind of crazy bills these folks with nothing else to do but mess with us.
Randy