CT: Bill increases fines for selling sick dogs
Posted on 03/06/2009
NORWALK
By JILL BODACH, Hour Staff Writer
Man's best friend is the topic of recent legislation at the State Capitol. A group of residents, along with a state legislator and attorney, are trying to pass a law increasing the liability of pet stores that sell sick or diseased dogs. The proposed legislation expands the state's current Lemon Law to include dogs and cats.
"Right now we have better information when we walk into a store to buy an appliance than we do when we go into a pet store to buy a puppy," said Karen Rasmussen, founder of the Westport Coalition Against Puppy Mills. "We treat these animals like commodities, which they aren't, but if that's how we're going to treat them, then we need to have a law to protect them the same way it protects other commodities."
Senate Bill 499, proposed by state Rep. Larry Cafero, R-142, House minority leader, would require a pet store to be liable -- up to two times the cost of the puppy -- for a dog who becomes sick after purchase and requires medical treatment.
"Right now, the law only allows the pet owner to return the pet to the store for a refund, which no pet owner is actually going to do, or to be reimbursed by the store up to $200 for vet bills, which doesn't even begin to cover the cost some of these customers are incurring," said G. Kenneth Bernhard, of Cohen & Wolf, legal counsel for the Westport Coalition Against Puppy Mills.
Bernhard said U.S. Department of Agriculture data shows "most" of the 30 pet stores in Connecticut buy puppies from puppy mills in the Midwest or Pennsylvania that have been cited for numerous violations for "deplorable conditions."
"Right now, no one can definitively say what a 'puppy mill' is because there is no set definition," Bernhard said. "You can usually tell by the number of dogs being bred at one time. Some of these puppy mills have 60, 70, even 100 dogs."
Cafero said he decided to support the legislation after learning about the conditions of the puppy mills. "In some cases these puppies are coming from deplorable conditions, and the consumer becomes vulnerable because they fall in love with these pets and would do anything to help them, which sometimes means spending thousands of dollars in vet bills," Cafero said.
Cafero said the legislation does not mean to accuse all breeders of being unsavory. "There are many very legit, upstanding breeders who take great pride in breeding dogs for household pets and treat the pets with care and love until they find a home for them," Cafero said. "Unfortunately, not all of them are that way."
Rasmussen said her main goal is to educate the public. "We want the public to be educated and the pet stores to be more transparent about where they are getting these puppies from," Rasmussen said.
Jill Bodach is a features and general assignment reporter. She may be reached at (203) 354-1046 or jbodach@thehour.com.
Source: http://www.thehour.com/story/466086
Saturday, March 7, 2009
OK: Happy tails: Puppy-mill bill advances
OK: Happy tails: Puppy-mill bill advances
By World's Editorial Writers
Published: 3/7/2009 2:24 AM
Last Modified: 3/7/2009 3:35 AM
The Oklahoma House chose the right and responsible course recently in approving the Pet Quality Assurance Act, the so-called puppy-mill bill that should help improve Oklahoma's reputation on this front — and the lives of lots of lovable pooches as well.
The fact the bill passed by a huge margin of 74 to 26 suggests House members were keenly aware of the popularity of a measure that will establish some reasonable controls on Oklahoma breeders.
Let's hope the state Senate shares this view.
For years, Oklahoma has been considered one of the top puppy producers in the entire nation, producing tens of thousands of puppies each year that are transported all across the country. While there certainly are many reputable and responsible breeders, there also are some who don't have the ability or willingness to maintain even the most minimal of standards. Recent news stories reflecting horrific conditions at a few breeding operations are testament to that sad phenomenon.
The new measure establishes minimum standards for dog breeding operations, based on federal regulations, and would apply to all facilities transferring more than 35 dogs, cats, kittens or puppies in a year.
Rep. Lee Denney, R-Cushing, is a veterinarian who was the chief proponent of the measure and who worked long hours to craft a compromise that was acceptable to both animal-welfare advocates and breeders.
In pushing for the bill, Denney noted that it was not as much about the puppies — most of whom are
transferred from breeders at very young ages — as it was about the adult breeding dogs that sometimes are subjected to inhumane conditions. She also correctly observed that the bill should help address some of the consumer issues that arise when substandard conditions are present.
Another veterinarian, Rep. Brian Renegar, D-McAlester, said the bill encompasses common-sense regulations that protect the public as well as animals.
Surely state senators will see the wisdom of approving this reasonable and necessary measure.
Source: http://www.tulsaworld.com/opinion/article.aspx?subjectid=61&articleid=20090307_61_A14_TheOkl972942&allcom=1
By World's Editorial Writers
Published: 3/7/2009 2:24 AM
Last Modified: 3/7/2009 3:35 AM
The Oklahoma House chose the right and responsible course recently in approving the Pet Quality Assurance Act, the so-called puppy-mill bill that should help improve Oklahoma's reputation on this front — and the lives of lots of lovable pooches as well.
The fact the bill passed by a huge margin of 74 to 26 suggests House members were keenly aware of the popularity of a measure that will establish some reasonable controls on Oklahoma breeders.
Let's hope the state Senate shares this view.
For years, Oklahoma has been considered one of the top puppy producers in the entire nation, producing tens of thousands of puppies each year that are transported all across the country. While there certainly are many reputable and responsible breeders, there also are some who don't have the ability or willingness to maintain even the most minimal of standards. Recent news stories reflecting horrific conditions at a few breeding operations are testament to that sad phenomenon.
The new measure establishes minimum standards for dog breeding operations, based on federal regulations, and would apply to all facilities transferring more than 35 dogs, cats, kittens or puppies in a year.
Rep. Lee Denney, R-Cushing, is a veterinarian who was the chief proponent of the measure and who worked long hours to craft a compromise that was acceptable to both animal-welfare advocates and breeders.
In pushing for the bill, Denney noted that it was not as much about the puppies — most of whom are
transferred from breeders at very young ages — as it was about the adult breeding dogs that sometimes are subjected to inhumane conditions. She also correctly observed that the bill should help address some of the consumer issues that arise when substandard conditions are present.
Another veterinarian, Rep. Brian Renegar, D-McAlester, said the bill encompasses common-sense regulations that protect the public as well as animals.
Surely state senators will see the wisdom of approving this reasonable and necessary measure.
Source: http://www.tulsaworld.com/opinion/article.aspx?subjectid=61&articleid=20090307_61_A14_TheOkl972942&allcom=1
IA: Backers: 'Puppy mill' bill in danger
IA: Backers: 'Puppy mill' bill in danger
By TONY LEYS • tleys@dmreg.com • March 7, 2009
An animal-rights group complained Friday that a prominent Iowa legislator is holding up a bill that would crack down on "puppy mills." The activists suspect Rep. Dolores Mertz plans to kill their bill, House File 486. They said the bill passed the Public Safety Committee last week and appeared headed to the House floor, but Mertz asked that it first be brought before the House Agriculture Committee, of which she is chairwoman.
The bill would allow state officials to inspect federally licensed dog breeders if someone filed a complaint about the businesses.
Advocates say the bill is needed because some of the dog breeders with the worst conditions hold licenses from the U.S. Department of Agriculture. They said Iowa and Kansas are the only states that do not have some control over such facilities, and they added that Iowa is the nation's third-largest supplier of puppies.
Mary LaHay, director of Iowa Voters for Companion Animals, said many dog breeders are legitimate. But she said some keep dogs in horrible conditions, such as being crammed in small cages around the clock. "They might never get out in their lives," she said. "They might spend eight years in a cage."
Mertz denied doing anything underhanded. She said bills occasionally are considered by two committees before going to the House floor. The Ottosen Democrat said the bill will get a fair hearing, but she expressed mixed emotions about it. She said that she does not support irresponsible breeders but doubts they are a major problem.
"There might be a few bad ones out there, but you shouldn't punish everyone for a few," she said. Mertz said she is wary about adding duties to overburdened state inspectors when federal inspectors already oversee many dog breeders.
The bill is opposed by a dog breeders' group called the Iowa Federation of Animal Owners. Chairman Joe Gerst, who raises Yorkshire terriers in Amana, said federal inspectors do a good job of overseeing the 450 Iowa breeders who have federal licenses. He said the debate over the bill diverts attention from the real problem, which is unlicensed breeders.
Gerst said he was not comforted by the fact that, under the bill, state inspectors would stay away from federally licensed breeders unless they received a complaint. He said animal-rights activists could file baseless complaints about legitimate breeders. "When you're in this business, you're a target," he said.
Rep. Mark Kuhn, a Charles City Democrat who supports the bill, said he was unsure why leaders sent it to the Agriculture Committee instead of to the floor. "If it needs further work, that's fine," he said. "But if they put it there to die, that's disappointing."
Source: http://www.desmoinesregister.com/article/20090307/NEWS10/903070332/-1/SPORTS09/Backers+++Puppy+mill++bill+in+danger
By TONY LEYS • tleys@dmreg.com • March 7, 2009
An animal-rights group complained Friday that a prominent Iowa legislator is holding up a bill that would crack down on "puppy mills." The activists suspect Rep. Dolores Mertz plans to kill their bill, House File 486. They said the bill passed the Public Safety Committee last week and appeared headed to the House floor, but Mertz asked that it first be brought before the House Agriculture Committee, of which she is chairwoman.
The bill would allow state officials to inspect federally licensed dog breeders if someone filed a complaint about the businesses.
Advocates say the bill is needed because some of the dog breeders with the worst conditions hold licenses from the U.S. Department of Agriculture. They said Iowa and Kansas are the only states that do not have some control over such facilities, and they added that Iowa is the nation's third-largest supplier of puppies.
Mary LaHay, director of Iowa Voters for Companion Animals, said many dog breeders are legitimate. But she said some keep dogs in horrible conditions, such as being crammed in small cages around the clock. "They might never get out in their lives," she said. "They might spend eight years in a cage."
Mertz denied doing anything underhanded. She said bills occasionally are considered by two committees before going to the House floor. The Ottosen Democrat said the bill will get a fair hearing, but she expressed mixed emotions about it. She said that she does not support irresponsible breeders but doubts they are a major problem.
"There might be a few bad ones out there, but you shouldn't punish everyone for a few," she said. Mertz said she is wary about adding duties to overburdened state inspectors when federal inspectors already oversee many dog breeders.
The bill is opposed by a dog breeders' group called the Iowa Federation of Animal Owners. Chairman Joe Gerst, who raises Yorkshire terriers in Amana, said federal inspectors do a good job of overseeing the 450 Iowa breeders who have federal licenses. He said the debate over the bill diverts attention from the real problem, which is unlicensed breeders.
Gerst said he was not comforted by the fact that, under the bill, state inspectors would stay away from federally licensed breeders unless they received a complaint. He said animal-rights activists could file baseless complaints about legitimate breeders. "When you're in this business, you're a target," he said.
Rep. Mark Kuhn, a Charles City Democrat who supports the bill, said he was unsure why leaders sent it to the Agriculture Committee instead of to the floor. "If it needs further work, that's fine," he said. "But if they put it there to die, that's disappointing."
Source: http://www.desmoinesregister.com/article/20090307/NEWS10/903070332/-1/SPORTS09/Backers+++Puppy+mill++bill+in+danger
Thursday, February 12, 2009
Scary recommendations...
There is a kennel magazine that's been published since 1990 and I won't name it because that would be publicizing and supporting it simply by sending surfers there... If you're that interested in it, email me privately and I'll send the link to it...
In their December/January issue, someone wrote in to the editor and asked some of the following questions:
Now's here's the scary recommendations this inquirer was given... And people wonder why we PMP fighters do what we do so passionately???
The Cocker has the highest number of genetic health issues followed by several of these 'bread and butter' breeds! A hundred females plus 2 or more males for each breed - he's recommending 10 breeds - minimum of 120 dogs for a 'medium sized' kennel... One breeding male & female, combined with their offspring, can produce over 20,000 puppies in a two year period for the millers breed the females on every heat... You do the math... Anyone else wonder why the PMP industry is so heinous?... Do I need to start listing the PMP busts that have occurred already this year?... Most were at least 200 dogs & puppies - some were at least 300 or more - but all severely taxed the humane organizations and shelters as they tried to salvage, treat and take care of these dogs and puppies that arrived in their hands - usually ill, matted and poorly undersocialized!
The best place to sell is anywhere you can find a buyer??? That's right, let's just churn out these puppies and cram them down the general public's throat through whatever means you can. Makes no difference that many of these will end up in this nation's shelter system and the majority will go the rendering plants as dead carcasses... HOW DOES A PUPPY MILLER SLEEP AT NIGHT, knowing this is what they are doing to these life forms??? (shaking my head here in disgust!)
About the only part in this answer that gives me hope... If we continue to fight this industry - even if in some small way in whatever manner you can - maybe one day this industry will be licensed and regulated...
Furthermore, every REPUTABLE dog breeder knows that you CANNOT 'make a living' breeding dogs... If you are 'making a living' (and a profit), you're doing something wrong and cutting corners that is causing this massive amount of unwanted dogs in an already overpopulated shelter & rescue system across this nation... Reputable breeders participate in this passion because they care about the breed they are breeding, not just 'churning out puppies' to make a living!
"Those who try the internet should be prepared to handle unreasonable complaints and demands for refunds."... Hmmmm... I wonder why?... Could it be that news good and bad travels faster on the Internet because politics and those in power do not control the Internet?... We can report on and comment about this industry because no one's hand is in our pocket?...
Now if we could only wake up the legislators in this country and expose this mindset to them, show them the bottom line of what it does to their budgets as they have to dispose of this industry's castoffs... This is one of the few industries in this country that is virtually unregulated and the majority of the industry is underground, doesn't pay its fair share of taxes, but every citizen who does pay their taxes subsidizes the industry, whether or not they ever owned a dog or ever plan on having one! You drive a car, you pay fuel taxes... You have phone service, you pay taxes on that... Think about it... If you do, you'll soon get angry over the amounts of taxpayer dollars that are spent to run and maintain shelters as they euthanize the 6,000,000 unwanted companion animals each year!
In their December/January issue, someone wrote in to the editor and asked some of the following questions:
"In your experience, for a small kennel owner that is making a living being a dog breeder, how many dogs do they typically own? How many does the medium kennel owner have?? Where do they sell the majority of their puppies? Auctions, newspaper, internet, Hunte Corp, etc...????? I live in SW Oklahoma and I am a teacher who is wanting to get ideas of what it would take to become a breeder full time."
Now's here's the scary recommendations this inquirer was given... And people wonder why we PMP fighters do what we do so passionately???
First, you cannot make a living with a small kennel. I would recommend a medium sized kennel of 100 females plus 2 or more males for every breed you raise. You should have 10 breeds to always have at least 1 or 2 breeds bringing top dollar. Stay with at least 5 or 6 ‘bread & butter’ breeds like, doxies, poodle, shih tzu, yorkie, maltese, cocker, etc.
The Cocker has the highest number of genetic health issues followed by several of these 'bread and butter' breeds! A hundred females plus 2 or more males for each breed - he's recommending 10 breeds - minimum of 120 dogs for a 'medium sized' kennel... One breeding male & female, combined with their offspring, can produce over 20,000 puppies in a two year period for the millers breed the females on every heat... You do the math... Anyone else wonder why the PMP industry is so heinous?... Do I need to start listing the PMP busts that have occurred already this year?... Most were at least 200 dogs & puppies - some were at least 300 or more - but all severely taxed the humane organizations and shelters as they tried to salvage, treat and take care of these dogs and puppies that arrived in their hands - usually ill, matted and poorly undersocialized!
The best place to sell is anywhere you can find a buyer. Brokers are your most trouble free source. Those who try the internet should be prepared to handle unreasonable complaints and demands for refunds. You may also have trouble with airlines and ultimately you will earn the extra income you receive.
The best place to sell is anywhere you can find a buyer??? That's right, let's just churn out these puppies and cram them down the general public's throat through whatever means you can. Makes no difference that many of these will end up in this nation's shelter system and the majority will go the rendering plants as dead carcasses... HOW DOES A PUPPY MILLER SLEEP AT NIGHT, knowing this is what they are doing to these life forms??? (shaking my head here in disgust!)
I would recommend that you get a federal and state license, even if you do not need one because I feel the time is coming when you will not have a choice. You will need to join OKPP and NAPO for help in your business.
About the only part in this answer that gives me hope... If we continue to fight this industry - even if in some small way in whatever manner you can - maybe one day this industry will be licensed and regulated...
Furthermore, every REPUTABLE dog breeder knows that you CANNOT 'make a living' breeding dogs... If you are 'making a living' (and a profit), you're doing something wrong and cutting corners that is causing this massive amount of unwanted dogs in an already overpopulated shelter & rescue system across this nation... Reputable breeders participate in this passion because they care about the breed they are breeding, not just 'churning out puppies' to make a living!
"Those who try the internet should be prepared to handle unreasonable complaints and demands for refunds."... Hmmmm... I wonder why?... Could it be that news good and bad travels faster on the Internet because politics and those in power do not control the Internet?... We can report on and comment about this industry because no one's hand is in our pocket?...
Now if we could only wake up the legislators in this country and expose this mindset to them, show them the bottom line of what it does to their budgets as they have to dispose of this industry's castoffs... This is one of the few industries in this country that is virtually unregulated and the majority of the industry is underground, doesn't pay its fair share of taxes, but every citizen who does pay their taxes subsidizes the industry, whether or not they ever owned a dog or ever plan on having one! You drive a car, you pay fuel taxes... You have phone service, you pay taxes on that... Think about it... If you do, you'll soon get angry over the amounts of taxpayer dollars that are spent to run and maintain shelters as they euthanize the 6,000,000 unwanted companion animals each year!
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
Another puppy mill bust - Tennessee
Yet another puppy mill bust - details here - this time in Tennessee. Initially it was reported as 200 but later the number was upped to 275.
Per the first article, "The ASPCA defines puppy mills as "substandard commercial breeding operations that house dogs in overcrowded and often unsanitary conditions, without adequate veterinary care, food, water, and socialization."
We once again have a definition of the problem... why can't we find a solution to this?
Per the first article, "The ASPCA defines puppy mills as "substandard commercial breeding operations that house dogs in overcrowded and often unsanitary conditions, without adequate veterinary care, food, water, and socialization."
We once again have a definition of the problem... why can't we find a solution to this?
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)