Pluba Home | Pluba Forums | Pet Classifieds | Pluba Community | Ask A Vet.. | Pluba Chat
Back to Pluba.com Pluba Forums For the Critters... Breeders Corner... 4/18/07 - CA AB 1634 AMENDMENTS AVAILABLE
Go
New
Find
Notify
Tools
Reply
Good Pluba
Posted
Sorry DJ's but the actions and ignorance of one person or a few does not justify the punishment of many.
It is exactly this type of thinking that fuels the PETA and AR backed anti-breeding legislation running rampant in this country.
These AR groups take the worst examples of people who breed that they can come up with and say SEE THIS is why NO ONE should be allowed to breed! THAT IS WHERE THIS IS GOING. THIS TYPE OF LEGISLATION IS JUST A FOOT IN THE DOOR.
We HAVE legislation ALREADY on the books to deal with those who are abusing, neglecting and/or not giving proper care to their animals.
This type of rationale says because SOME horrible people hurt or don't take proper care of their animals NO ONE should be able to have an animal - which by the way is EXACTLY where PETA wants to take this since they think owning a companion animal is SLAVERY.
Again, this bill encourages PET SHOPS (thus PUPPYMILLS) and COMMERCIAL BREEDERS - NOT the type of breeders I want caring for even more animals or the future of my breed! THIS IS ENOUGH OF A REASON TO OPPOSE IT. Then there's the completely ridiculous and UNHEALTHY 4 month spay/neuter clause which is another issue altogether. And the increase in SMUGGLING (and suffering!) of animals coming across the border from Mexico - this bill will ENCOURAGE this horrible practice!
This is BAD legislation that will HURT ANIMALS. 
Posts: 3789 | Location (City, State): SoCA | Registered: Sun January 11 2004
Exceptional Pluba
Posted
Oh okay, so lets just go ahead and allow those who are abusing these breeds to continue to do so in the manner they always have been. Do you think that is a better solution?
Breeding dogs is not an easy job if you're doing it right, and most people out there are not doing it right.
I do not support PETA and I never have. That group is nothing but a bunch of whack jobs that become the thorn in the sides of animal lovers everywhere. The biggest of hypocrites. I'm not looking at what the future holds for a bill like this, I'm only looking at right now. Nothing else is working.
Frankly, I'm tired of people making it harder to do what I want to do. For every true to breed quality dog that is produced, there's hundreds of that same breed being ruined. There is no two steps forward and three steps back here, we have yet to take the first real step. If someone comes in and wants to mandate what I do so be it, I'll do anything to protect my breed.
*****************
"Fall in love with a MINI..... everything else is just a TOY."
Posts: 6909 | Registered: Fri May 02 2003
Pluba Freshman
Posted
quote:Originally posted by Dj's Doxies:
Frankly, I'm tired of people making it harder to do what I want to do. For every true to breed quality dog that is produced, there's hundreds of that same breed being ruined. There is no two steps forward and three steps back here, we have yet to take the first real step. If someone comes in and wants to mandate what I do so be it, I'll do anything to protect my breed.
You have a point! 
Kinda like my search for an apartment. It gets harder because of irresponsible people and I am not willing to let go of my pets.
Damn good Guitarist-loving girl!!
Posts: 738 | Location (City, State): Waiting for Timmy like a lonely puppy | Registered: Thu August 10 2006
Good Pluba
Posted
quote:Originally posted by Dj's Doxies:
Oh okay, so lets just go ahead and allow those who are abusing these breeds to continue to do so in the manner they always have been. Do you think that is a better solution?
AS IF that's what I said or what I think ... but how about actually using the AMPLE laws that are ALREADY on the books for THOSE people (bad breeders) instead of punishing those who are doing it RIGHT for the others' incorrect actions?
quote:Originally posted by Dj's Doxies:
Breeding dogs is not an easy job if you're doing it right, and most people out there are not doing it right.
AGAIN, there are plenty of laws ALREADY on the books to take care of those who are NOT taking proper care of their dogs and breeding responsibly.
quote:Originally posted by Dj's Doxies:
I do not support PETA and I never have. That group is nothing but a bunch of whack jobs that become the thorn in the sides of animal lovers everywhere. The biggest of hypocrites. I'm not looking at what the future holds for a bill like this, I'm only looking at right now. Nothing else is working.
And it is exactly this type of knee-jerk not getting the big picture reaction that PETA and other AR groups count on when passing anti-breeder legislation. ONCE AGAIN - USE THE LAWS IN PLACE TO TAKE CARE OF THE PROBLEM.
quote:Originally posted by Dj's Doxies:
Frankly, I'm tired of people making it harder to do what I want to do. For every true to breed quality dog that is produced, there's hundreds of that same breed being ruined. There is no two steps forward and three steps back here, we have yet to take the first real step. If someone comes in and wants to mandate what I do so be it, I'll do anything to protect my breed.
You DON'T protect animals or the future of purebred dogs by ENCOURAGING PET SHOPS and MILLERS as this type of legislation does.
Posts: 3789 | Location (City, State): SoCA | Registered: Sun January 11 2004
Good Pluba
Posted
I heard from a friend that this bill passed ... bad news for pet lovers in California who want (and should be able) to find and adopt a quality purebred dog at a reasonable price.
And now let's watch and wait as we begin to hear about the increase of badly bred miller puppies coming out of CA pet shops (and the increase in price of these poorly bred puppies - not to mention the terrible conditions they come from and untold horrors their parents endure!) and how larger numbers of animals are being smuggled over the border from Mexico and their suffering - and talk about how much the animals have been HELPED!
Posts: 3789 | Location (City, State): SoCA | Registered: Sun January 11 2004
Good Pluba
Posted
Why, yes I did, oh observant one ... luckily for me and my dogs IF I am still living in this state by the time this idiotic piece of legislation goes into effect (a year from now) I am blessed enough to live in an area where I will be able to comply. But we've been talking about moving to another state for some time now for other reasons ... remains to be seen.
Sadly for many caring breeders they are not so fortunate as I am and this will end their breeding programs - and it is the animals being kept and bred by the millers, those being smuggled across the border from Mexico and the purebred loving community (and BREEDS) that will suffer.
I am sure Hunte is doing cartwheels. 
Posts: 3789 | Location (City, State): SoCA | Registered: Sun January 11 2004
Newba Pluba
Posted
quote:Originally posted by Ratlady:
AGAIN Norma you have missed the point. **sigh** Your rationale and the rationale behind this type of legislation is COMPLETELY backwards.
This bill does NOTHING BUT ENCOURAGE those breeders who breed FOR PROFIT ... but I would not expect this to bother you since you think for profit breeders are just fine. Personally the thought of encouraging commercial millers and pet shops - who we ALL know support puppymills - sickens me. 
THAT is why I have a problem with this bill. I'm sorry that you and others don't understand the true implications and underlying philosophies that are part and pracel with this type of legislation.
My concern over this issue is NOT about me - it is about the wellbeing of the animals involved and the future of purebred companion animals in this country. 
BOTTOM LINE: WHEN PET SHOPS AND COMMERCIAL MILLERS STAND TO GAIN, THE ANIMALS STAND TO LOSE, PERIOD.
Nothing more to say to someone who doesn't grasp that concept.
This is where you are wrong. I do grasp what you are saying and I agree with some of it. I thought it was a given and pretty obvious, but in case it was not, my motives for liking this bill are not exactly pure. Even though it won’t directly benefit me, I have family and friends that will love to see this bill pass. Some of the reasons that you are so vehemently against this bill, are the main reasons that I and many others are for it. This bill was never intended to do away with PMs or CBs. It is for the average unlicensed BYBs and pet owners. This is why I said "It will be a good time to be a licensed breeder in California soon. Too bad I am done.” By licensed breeders I meant breeders with a kennel/business license who are already required to get one in order to legally keep and breed over certain numbers of dogs. Those breeders are not going anywhere regardless of the outcome of this bill. It was never meant for them. When a large portion of breeders suddenly stop breeding, it is inevitable that some one will pick up some of the slack.
Look at it this way.
The BYBs and the clueless pet owners are flooding the market with cheap poor quality "pure breeds" and mutts. They are the ones with countless oops litters that keep the shelters full. They are the ones who caused the problems for everyone to begin with. They are probably responsible for at least 70% of all of the dogs out there. Most likely the majority of those "breeders" will not be qualified for intact permit. They would be affected the most. Those are the ones that this bill really targets.
The licensed breeders which include professional (for profit) breeders such as many show dog breeders, puppy millers, commercial breeders and anything in between, will not be affected in any way since their kennel/business license already permits them to breed. They are not the target. Those breeders would indeed greatly benefit from this bill, no doubt about it. However, those breeders are at least licensed and inspected. They receive the most scrutiny from the AC. Unlike most other states, CA has very tough laws and regulations that licensed breeders have to follow. They have to comply and adhere to some tough standards where failure to comply could cost them a whole lot more then just their license and their dogs. Maybe this is why you do not want to have to get licensed. You do not want the scrutiny. Pet stores also have to follow some tough rules with very real and costly consequences for non compliance. http://www.dogplay.com/Breeding/lemonlaw.html.
Those laws do not apply to most of the BYBs or even the hobby show breeders, only licensed breeders and dealers have the privilege of following them.
Then there are those hobby show breeders with only few dogs that are not required to get a kennel license, but will have to get an intact permit. Those breeders are a fraction of the breeders out there. They have a whole different market niche then most and have little impact on the population as a whole. They are not the intended target of this bill either. They are a low priority for the AC which is why there are exceptions that will allow them to easily qualify for an intact permit for their show dogs. All they have to do is show a title or a receipt from an event they have entered or would have entered anyway. If the dog is not old enough, they can inform the AC that the pup is intended for show or other type of an approved competition and follow it up with the proper document when it is old enough. That is all there is to be qualified. If they are sincere in their motives, unless they got something to hide, real hobby breeders should have no problem with that.
Again, read the amended bill for yourself, not others’ outdated biased interpretation of it. Although it does not intend to adversely affect the licensed breeders as you may like or the real hobby breeders as you may fear, if properly enforced, this bill will severely impact the bybs which is what we all want, albeit for very different reasons, but the goal is still the same. No one is saying it is perfect, but at least it targets the specific group that is the main cause of overpopulation and the cause for the bad rap we all get. I am sure you all would like to see the likes of me gone as well, but don’t be greedy. You can’t have it all. A bird in hand is worth two in the bush. This bill will at least get rid of a big chunk of the trouble makers in California and take some of the pressure off the rest of us. You should be thankful for that instead of waiting for more.
As for Mexican pups, people will buy cheap pups no matter where they come from regardless of this bill. At least they will have to be fixed or that cheap pup will cost its owner another $500.
http://www.akc.org/news/index.cfm?article_id=3194
It did not pass just yet. It probably will though soon enough.
Posts: 210 | Registered: Fri April 21 2006
Good Pluba
Posted
quote:Originally posted by Norma:
quote:Originally posted by Ratlady:
...
BOTTOM LINE: WHEN PET SHOPS AND COMMERCIAL MILLERS STAND TO GAIN, THE ANIMALS STAND TO LOSE, PERIOD.
Nothing more to say to someone who doesn't grasp that concept.
This is where you are wrong. I do grasp what you are saying and I agree with some of it. I thought it was a given and pretty obvious, but in case it was not, my motives for liking this bill are not exactly pure. Even though it won’t directly benefit me, I have family and friends that will love to see this bill pass. Some of the reasons that you are so vehemently against this bill, are the main reasons that I and many others are for it. This bill was never intended to do away with PMs or CBs. It is for the average unlicensed BYBs and pet owners. This is why I said "It will be a good time to be a licensed breeder in California soon. Too bad I am done.” By licensed breeders I meant breeders with a kennel/business license who are already required to get one in order to legally keep and breed over certain numbers of dogs. Those breeders are not going anywhere regardless of the outcome of this bill. It was never meant for them. When a large portion of breeders suddenly stop breeding, it is inevitable that some one will pick up some of the slack.
....
Norma, LMBOPMP, yeah, that's right, I'm afraid of scrutiny! 
But seriously, I do think it's SAD that you and your for profit breeder friends are actually excited they they will get to profit off this total invasion of civil liberties and all of its dark untertones. There's just not much to discuss with someone who feels that way.
If this was about personal gain I suppose I would be thrilled because you are right this will cause an increaes in the price of quality purebred puppies - unfortunately it will also increase the price of sick crappy quality puppies coming from the mills that Pet Shops support (oh but let's just turn a blind eye to that!) ... so what if they have to refund monies for sick dogs, they charge so much per puppy it's just a part of doing buiness! But then I realize that you and the people you are talking about see these beautiful loving animals as a BUSINESS .. alas SOME of us just don't think in those terms and care more about the DOGS than our pocketbooks.
NO ONE hates irresponsible breeders and pet owners more than I do! And I've heard the lame arguments before ... but there is simply no excuse or reason to handle the problem with a bill such as this - there are other ways that do not encourage for profit breeders, millers and pet shops and strip those who are not offending of their civil liberties.
Some of us know that if this keeps up one day we will wake up to find that the breeds that SOME of us are passionate about are no longer because the millers and your friends the for profit breeders have ruined them.
Then there's PETA's hidden agenda ... but that'll come.
Okay, I'm done.
Later!
Posts: 3789 | Location (City, State): SoCA | Registered: Sun January 11 2004
Good Pluba
Posted
Now I amy not be understanding this bill correctly, but from what I am reading I would think that this bill would be welcome by the responsible breeders and the only ones complaining about it would be those breeders that just simply don't want to do what it would take to be lienced to continue breeding.
I for one believe that there should be laws against anyone breeding there animals in the ways that are done today. I believe all pets should be spayed and neutered.
I do also think that getting the animals fixed should be a more reasonable price but then again in many cases it is not the cost that stops people from having their animals fixed.
But as far as this bill is concerned, if you are a breeder or you show animals from what i read you can still do so as long as you get the permits to do so. So what is the actual problem with that?
To be honest I would prefer to hear from some of the more knowledgeable breeders on this. I think they would give me a clearer understanding of the bill, both pros and cons of it. Not to put anyone down but a certain few of you on this thread sound like your more mad about having to take it a step futher and just get the permits and that would cause me to question your breeding ethics in general.
Posts: 1750 | Location (City, State): My House, Florida | Registered: Fri June 09 2006
Newba Pluba
Posted
quote:Originally posted by myakkacity:
Not to put anyone down but a certain few of you on this thread sound like your more mad about having to take it a step futher and just get the permits and that would cause me to question your breeding ethics in general.
my point exactly. time for all of those high and mighty breeders to put up or shut up. They keep complaining about all the irresponsible breeders out there and how something has to be done, but when presented with an opportunity to deal a major blow to a whole bunch of them with one little bill, they all freak out. It sure makes you wonder. what are they afraid of?
It is time for you all, especially CA breeders, to show your cards. Are you really the reputable breeders you claim to be or just another run of the mill breeder with skeletons' filled closet you don't want any one to open?
This reminds me of a tv commercial I saw for the lotto. you see a couple looking out their window and see few bundles of cash falling from the sky. the woman say lets go get it, but the man say there is only 20 millions there, lets wait for some more. then a hoard of people suddenly show up and take it all leaving them with nothing
the moral is take what you can get when you can get it and don't wait for something better to come along because you may end up with nothing.
LMBOPMP?
That is a new one for me. what dose it stand for?
Posts: 210 | Registered: Fri April 21 2006
Good Pluba
Posted
Oh thank you for that ... I needed a good laugh! **For a moment Ratlady wonders if Myakka has ANY idea just HOW incredibly ridiculous she has just shown herself to be by saying she believes people should NOT be able to breed exactly the the way SHE does!?! (Does she really think we have all forgotten her litter of mutts? 
) However, Chauntelle quickly remembers how Myakka has proven herself utterly clueless so very many times on this forum and that there's really NO need to wonder!!!** Rich! Extra RIIIIICH!
Well, I WAS hoping that a REAL breeder or two might join in the discussion as to damage untold that antibreeder - and antibreed - legislation is having and will continue have even more so on the future of the purebred dog in this country ... but alas ... it seems only the ignorant wish to come out and play.**sigh**
And this is yet another prime example of why I rarely come to this board and why this place is dead ... I mean, really, it's a sad state of affairs when THIS is what passes as thought-provoking conversation here: simply more nonsensical drivel from the QUALITY breeders Myakka and Norma ... Myakka the MUTT breeder and Norma the "champion" of the PROFIT-DRIVEN MILLER! 'Nuff said!
Why even waste one's time?
Sometimes, like the past 24 hours or so, I think, well, go ahead and post, just maybe someone who might actually WANT to do the right thing but just doesn't know how will stop by and read something from a QUALITY, RESPONSIBLE BREEDER and LEARN and GROW; and there's still a chance that happens and those people simply are not posting ... but this is just beyond ridiculous. FOR THOSE OF US WHO LOVE OUR BREED THE CONCERN IS NOT ABOUT PERSONAL LOSS OR GAIN PEOPLE - IT IS ABOUT THE ANIMALS AND FUTURE OF PUREBRED DOGS! SHEESH!
Thankfully, I do know other quality fanciers who truly CARE about their dogs and the future of their BREED(s) and don't just see them as EXPERIMENTS (oh, let's let our mutt have a litter of pups so the kids can see the "miracle of life" - groan!) and DOLLAR SIGNS or I would feel utterly alone in my passion if all I had was this place! 
Still I do tend to get a bit discouraged when I see so clearly the true state of most of the human race. This world just doesn't have a chance with so much ignorance and special interest blindness (not to mention spiritual and moral bankruptcy!) procreating and raising up future generations. 
No it's not a crime to be ignorant but maybe it should be like getting drunk ... it's okay if you do it in the privacy of your own home but if you are going to operate a computer keyboard on the "information highway" there should be fines involved! 
It is a terribly upside down world where all must have a license to breed a companion animal but anybody - including serial killers and no matter how insane or lacking in parental skills or knowledge - can breed and bear children! Too bad people don't have to obtain breeding licenses before they can reproduce! Mandatory spay/neuter of certain people seems like a very good idea indeed!! 
BTW, LMBOPMP is Laughing My Butt Off Peeing My Pants - something I would do a lot more of if the ripple effects of the utter ignorance and greed of some were not so far reaching and negative and often heartbreaking. Like I said before, Hunte Corporation is laughing all the way to the bank with every new piece of antibreeder legislation passed. Big money is behind this movement. And GREED is NEVER a good thing when it comes to the welfare of animals.
Stick a fork in this conversation, it's done! Mutt and for profit breeders were always a problem with this forum but they do seem to have completely taken over this place and it's next to impossible to have a serious conversation with a serious breeder here ... 
Posts: 3789 | Location (City, State): SoCA | Registered: Sun January 11 2004
Good Pluba
Posted
I am not well versed with this issue, but what many have glossed over is, most reputable show breeders are not licensed. Most only have 1 to 3 litters every 3 years.
Once the foot is in the door, where does it stop?
I'm not sure which side of the fence I stand on at the moment as I have not researched this bill as closely as I probably should. 
Mya, again your post shows me how you say one thing, yet do another.
Some are here because they hope to make a difference, others like to roll around in the feces. You'll be able to "sniff them out" in no time. -DJ's Doxies,
Posts: 3383 | Registered: Wed December 08 2004
Good Pluba
Posted
quote:Originally posted by Hu-Dare:
... Once the foot is in the door, where does it stop?
Exactly ... for example IF this were REALLY about the ANIMALS and not being driven by millers like Hunte and a foot in the door by AR dementos, here's a perfectly LOGICAL solution:
Mandatory microchipping of ALL animals would PROVE where abandoned or surrendered dogs are coming from and force those who are actually responsible for them to step up to the place (thus TRULY finding the target audience - irresponsible pet owners and breeders) and still manages to leave the choice of spay/neuter where it belongs and is rightfully held - with the animal's owner!
Posts: 3789 | Location (City, State): SoCA | Registered: Sun January 11 2004
Newba Pluba
Posted
quote:Originally posted by Ratlady:
Mandatory microchipping of ALL animals would PROVE where abandoned or surrendered dogs are coming from and force those who are actually responsible for them to step up to the place (thus TRULY finding the target audience - irresponsible pet owners and breeders) and still manages to leave the choice of spay/neuter where it belongs and is rightfully held - with the animal's owner!
It is already mandatory where I am. This may stop people from dumping their dogs on the street, and help reunite lost dogs with their owners, however it is still perfectly legal to dump dogs at the shelters and the chip does not prevent them from breeding indiscriminately. It also does not tell the AC who the breeder is. MC would not help in that case. Although, in my area, all pups must be chipped as well by the breeder. Not only that, but the breeder have to notify the AC whenever they have a litter and who got what. This made many angry because they can no longer hide the income they receive from their pups. there is an official written declaration of how many pups you sold for the tax man can see.
Microchiping is good step in the right direction, but it is not enough. The only way it would do real good is if the breeder is licensed. Otherwise, there is no way to enforce it unless the AC happens to stumble on the unlicensed breeder. But then all they get is a slap on the wrist. With out the stiff penalties this bill provides, people have no incentive to comply.
No matter what anyone says, it always boils down to money. This is the main reason people are either for it or against it. Depend on what side you are, this bill will either cost you money or make you money. It is either fees you will have to pay, money you would have to spend to comply, money you would lose from loss of income if you can't comply, money you would be forced to pay in taxes on the "non-existing profit" you were able to hide until now or the whole lot more money you would make with no competition around.
That is right no matter what anyone says, money is a big motivator, no matter who you are. Money makes the world go around.
Posts: 210 | Registered: Fri April 21 2006
Good Pluba
Posted
quote:Originally posted by Hu-Dare:
I am not well versed with this issue, but what many have glossed over is, most reputable show breeders are not licensed. Most only have 1 to 3 litters every 3 years.
Once the foot is in the door, where does it stop?
I'm not sure which side of the fence I stand on at the moment as I have not researched this bill as closely as I probably should.
Mya, again your post shows me how you say one thing, yet do another.
Hu I understand the confusion as I did breed Tinker. However I have not always agreed with getting pets fixed. It has only been in the last several years that I have changed my tune on the subject. I was young and stupid now I am growing and learning. I won't say I made a mistake breeding Tinker as I have 3 beautiful pups from her. I will say I understand were everyone was coming from on the subject and That was my last pet litter ever.
As far as this bill is concerned I went back and read it again last night. I see where the only ones that can get the the permits must prove their animals are registered with one of the places such as AKC, CKC ect. I think I seen some where that it is also limited on how many litters a year. Which to me says that puppy mills would not benefit from this bill. I will be looking at it closer tonight.
Hu ~ one more note that I thought of last night. The chances of me breeding Tinkerbell if we had a law like that would have been zero. Therefor although I did breed her against many people telling me I shouldn't, I would not have if there had been such a law in place, she would have been fixed well before I had even thought of it. I follow the law.
Posts: 1750 | Location (City, State): My House, Florida | Registered: Fri June 09 2006
Pluba Freshman
Posted
Mya you better register with your local USDA and microchip all your chickens then;
http://nonais.org/
http://www.amerpoultryassn.com/savehobby.htm
http://www.amerpoultryassn.com/Why%20You%20Should%20Oppose.doc
Posts: 742 | Location (City, State): The town of don't you worry | Registered: Sat May 28 2005
Newba Pluba
Posted
quote:Originally posted by Canine:
I think you need to be careful with these generalizations. Believe it or not, there ARE actual "fanciers" out here who truly love dogs and don't factor monetary issues/gain into their hobby.
So I keep hearing, but I have yet to meet one in the real world.
From my vast experience, they are all hypocrites. Yes, I know, another generalization.
Posts: 210 | Registered: Fri April 21 2006
Good Pluba
Posted
quote:Originally posted by Norma:
quote:Originally posted by Canine:
I think you need to be careful with these generalizations. Believe it or not, there ARE actual "fanciers" out here who truly love dogs and don't factor monetary issues/gain into their hobby.
So I keep hearing, but I have yet to meet one in the real world.
From my vast experience, they are all hypocrites. Yes, I know, another generalization.
I know some hypocrites who I label a "Glorified Mill," but you know what they say......"Birds of a feather........." I'm sorry to hear your world is absent of my peers. Sincerely.
Some are here because they hope to make a difference, others like to roll around in the feces. You'll be able to "sniff them out" in no time. -DJ's Doxies,
Posts: 3383 | Registered: Wed December 08 2004
Pluba Home | Pluba Forums | Pet Classifieds | Pluba Community | Ask A Vet.. | Pluba Chat
Back to Pluba.com Pluba Forums For the Critters... Breeders Corner... 4/18/07 - CA AB 1634 AMENDMENTS AVAILABLE
Pluba Forums For the Critters... Breeders Corner... 4/18/07 - CA AB 1634 AMENDMENTS AVAILABLE|
Go
|
New
|
Find
|
Notify
|
Tools
|
Reply
|
|
|
Good Pluba |
Sorry DJ's but the actions and ignorance of one person or a few does not justify the punishment of many. It is exactly this type of thinking that fuels the PETA and AR backed anti-breeding legislation running rampant in this country. These AR groups take the worst examples of people who breed that they can come up with and say SEE THIS is why NO ONE should be allowed to breed! THAT IS WHERE THIS IS GOING. THIS TYPE OF LEGISLATION IS JUST A FOOT IN THE DOOR. We HAVE legislation ALREADY on the books to deal with those who are abusing, neglecting and/or not giving proper care to their animals. This type of rationale says because SOME horrible people hurt or don't take proper care of their animals NO ONE should be able to have an animal - which by the way is EXACTLY where PETA wants to take this since they think owning a companion animal is SLAVERY. Again, this bill encourages PET SHOPS (thus PUPPYMILLS) and COMMERCIAL BREEDERS - NOT the type of breeders I want caring for even more animals or the future of my breed! THIS IS ENOUGH OF A REASON TO OPPOSE IT. Then there's the completely ridiculous and UNHEALTHY 4 month spay/neuter clause which is another issue altogether. And the increase in SMUGGLING (and suffering!) of animals coming across the border from Mexico - this bill will ENCOURAGE this horrible practice! This is BAD legislation that will HURT ANIMALS. |
|||
|
|
Exceptional Pluba |
Oh okay, so lets just go ahead and allow those who are abusing these breeds to continue to do so in the manner they always have been. Do you think that is a better solution?
Breeding dogs is not an easy job if you're doing it right, and most people out there are not doing it right. I do not support PETA and I never have. That group is nothing but a bunch of whack jobs that become the thorn in the sides of animal lovers everywhere. The biggest of hypocrites. I'm not looking at what the future holds for a bill like this, I'm only looking at right now. Nothing else is working. Frankly, I'm tired of people making it harder to do what I want to do. For every true to breed quality dog that is produced, there's hundreds of that same breed being ruined. There is no two steps forward and three steps back here, we have yet to take the first real step. If someone comes in and wants to mandate what I do so be it, I'll do anything to protect my breed. ***************** "Fall in love with a MINI..... everything else is just a TOY." |
|||
|
|
Pluba Freshman |
You have a point! Kinda like my search for an apartment. It gets harder because of irresponsible people and I am not willing to let go of my pets. Damn good Guitarist-loving girl!! |
|||
|
|
Good Pluba |
AS IF that's what I said or what I think ... but how about actually using the AMPLE laws that are ALREADY on the books for THOSE people (bad breeders) instead of punishing those who are doing it RIGHT for the others' incorrect actions?
AGAIN, there are plenty of laws ALREADY on the books to take care of those who are NOT taking proper care of their dogs and breeding responsibly.
And it is exactly this type of knee-jerk not getting the big picture reaction that PETA and other AR groups count on when passing anti-breeder legislation. ONCE AGAIN - USE THE LAWS IN PLACE TO TAKE CARE OF THE PROBLEM.
You DON'T protect animals or the future of purebred dogs by ENCOURAGING PET SHOPS and MILLERS as this type of legislation does. |
|||
|
|
Good Pluba |
I heard from a friend that this bill passed ... bad news for pet lovers in California who want (and should be able) to find and adopt a quality purebred dog at a reasonable price. And now let's watch and wait as we begin to hear about the increase of badly bred miller puppies coming out of CA pet shops (and the increase in price of these poorly bred puppies - not to mention the terrible conditions they come from and untold horrors their parents endure!) and how larger numbers of animals are being smuggled over the border from Mexico and their suffering - and talk about how much the animals have been HELPED! |
|||
|
|
Good Pluba |
Why, yes I did, oh observant one ... luckily for me and my dogs IF I am still living in this state by the time this idiotic piece of legislation goes into effect (a year from now) I am blessed enough to live in an area where I will be able to comply. But we've been talking about moving to another state for some time now for other reasons ... remains to be seen.
Sadly for many caring breeders they are not so fortunate as I am and this will end their breeding programs - and it is the animals being kept and bred by the millers, those being smuggled across the border from Mexico and the purebred loving community (and BREEDS) that will suffer. I am sure Hunte is doing cartwheels. |
|||
|
|
Newba Pluba |
This is where you are wrong. I do grasp what you are saying and I agree with some of it. I thought it was a given and pretty obvious, but in case it was not, my motives for liking this bill are not exactly pure. Even though it won’t directly benefit me, I have family and friends that will love to see this bill pass. Some of the reasons that you are so vehemently against this bill, are the main reasons that I and many others are for it. This bill was never intended to do away with PMs or CBs. It is for the average unlicensed BYBs and pet owners. This is why I said "It will be a good time to be a licensed breeder in California soon. Too bad I am done.” By licensed breeders I meant breeders with a kennel/business license who are already required to get one in order to legally keep and breed over certain numbers of dogs. Those breeders are not going anywhere regardless of the outcome of this bill. It was never meant for them. When a large portion of breeders suddenly stop breeding, it is inevitable that some one will pick up some of the slack. Look at it this way. The BYBs and the clueless pet owners are flooding the market with cheap poor quality "pure breeds" and mutts. They are the ones with countless oops litters that keep the shelters full. They are the ones who caused the problems for everyone to begin with. They are probably responsible for at least 70% of all of the dogs out there. Most likely the majority of those "breeders" will not be qualified for intact permit. They would be affected the most. Those are the ones that this bill really targets. The licensed breeders which include professional (for profit) breeders such as many show dog breeders, puppy millers, commercial breeders and anything in between, will not be affected in any way since their kennel/business license already permits them to breed. They are not the target. Those breeders would indeed greatly benefit from this bill, no doubt about it. However, those breeders are at least licensed and inspected. They receive the most scrutiny from the AC. Unlike most other states, CA has very tough laws and regulations that licensed breeders have to follow. They have to comply and adhere to some tough standards where failure to comply could cost them a whole lot more then just their license and their dogs. Maybe this is why you do not want to have to get licensed. You do not want the scrutiny. Pet stores also have to follow some tough rules with very real and costly consequences for non compliance. http://www.dogplay.com/Breeding/lemonlaw.html. Those laws do not apply to most of the BYBs or even the hobby show breeders, only licensed breeders and dealers have the privilege of following them. Then there are those hobby show breeders with only few dogs that are not required to get a kennel license, but will have to get an intact permit. Those breeders are a fraction of the breeders out there. They have a whole different market niche then most and have little impact on the population as a whole. They are not the intended target of this bill either. They are a low priority for the AC which is why there are exceptions that will allow them to easily qualify for an intact permit for their show dogs. All they have to do is show a title or a receipt from an event they have entered or would have entered anyway. If the dog is not old enough, they can inform the AC that the pup is intended for show or other type of an approved competition and follow it up with the proper document when it is old enough. That is all there is to be qualified. If they are sincere in their motives, unless they got something to hide, real hobby breeders should have no problem with that. Again, read the amended bill for yourself, not others’ outdated biased interpretation of it. Although it does not intend to adversely affect the licensed breeders as you may like or the real hobby breeders as you may fear, if properly enforced, this bill will severely impact the bybs which is what we all want, albeit for very different reasons, but the goal is still the same. No one is saying it is perfect, but at least it targets the specific group that is the main cause of overpopulation and the cause for the bad rap we all get. I am sure you all would like to see the likes of me gone as well, but don’t be greedy. You can’t have it all. A bird in hand is worth two in the bush. This bill will at least get rid of a big chunk of the trouble makers in California and take some of the pressure off the rest of us. You should be thankful for that instead of waiting for more. As for Mexican pups, people will buy cheap pups no matter where they come from regardless of this bill. At least they will have to be fixed or that cheap pup will cost its owner another $500. http://www.akc.org/news/index.cfm?article_id=3194 It did not pass just yet. It probably will though soon enough. |
|||
|
|
Good Pluba |
Norma, LMBOPMP, yeah, that's right, I'm afraid of scrutiny! But seriously, I do think it's SAD that you and your for profit breeder friends are actually excited they they will get to profit off this total invasion of civil liberties and all of its dark untertones. There's just not much to discuss with someone who feels that way. If this was about personal gain I suppose I would be thrilled because you are right this will cause an increaes in the price of quality purebred puppies - unfortunately it will also increase the price of sick crappy quality puppies coming from the mills that Pet Shops support (oh but let's just turn a blind eye to that!) ... so what if they have to refund monies for sick dogs, they charge so much per puppy it's just a part of doing buiness! But then I realize that you and the people you are talking about see these beautiful loving animals as a BUSINESS .. alas SOME of us just don't think in those terms and care more about the DOGS than our pocketbooks. NO ONE hates irresponsible breeders and pet owners more than I do! And I've heard the lame arguments before ... but there is simply no excuse or reason to handle the problem with a bill such as this - there are other ways that do not encourage for profit breeders, millers and pet shops and strip those who are not offending of their civil liberties. Some of us know that if this keeps up one day we will wake up to find that the breeds that SOME of us are passionate about are no longer because the millers and your friends the for profit breeders have ruined them. Then there's PETA's hidden agenda ... but that'll come. Okay, I'm done. Later! |
|||
|
|
Good Pluba |
Now I amy not be understanding this bill correctly, but from what I am reading I would think that this bill would be welcome by the responsible breeders and the only ones complaining about it would be those breeders that just simply don't want to do what it would take to be lienced to continue breeding.
I for one believe that there should be laws against anyone breeding there animals in the ways that are done today. I believe all pets should be spayed and neutered. I do also think that getting the animals fixed should be a more reasonable price but then again in many cases it is not the cost that stops people from having their animals fixed. But as far as this bill is concerned, if you are a breeder or you show animals from what i read you can still do so as long as you get the permits to do so. So what is the actual problem with that? To be honest I would prefer to hear from some of the more knowledgeable breeders on this. I think they would give me a clearer understanding of the bill, both pros and cons of it. Not to put anyone down but a certain few of you on this thread sound like your more mad about having to take it a step futher and just get the permits and that would cause me to question your breeding ethics in general. |
|||
|
|
Newba Pluba |
my point exactly. time for all of those high and mighty breeders to put up or shut up. They keep complaining about all the irresponsible breeders out there and how something has to be done, but when presented with an opportunity to deal a major blow to a whole bunch of them with one little bill, they all freak out. It sure makes you wonder. what are they afraid of? It is time for you all, especially CA breeders, to show your cards. Are you really the reputable breeders you claim to be or just another run of the mill breeder with skeletons' filled closet you don't want any one to open? This reminds me of a tv commercial I saw for the lotto. you see a couple looking out their window and see few bundles of cash falling from the sky. the woman say lets go get it, but the man say there is only 20 millions there, lets wait for some more. then a hoard of people suddenly show up and take it all leaving them with nothing the moral is take what you can get when you can get it and don't wait for something better to come along because you may end up with nothing. LMBOPMP? That is a new one for me. what dose it stand for? |
|||
|
|
Good Pluba |
Oh thank you for that ... I needed a good laugh! **For a moment Ratlady wonders if Myakka has ANY idea just HOW incredibly ridiculous she has just shown herself to be by saying she believes people should NOT be able to breed exactly the the way SHE does!?! (Does she really think we have all forgotten her litter of mutts? ) However, Chauntelle quickly remembers how Myakka has proven herself utterly clueless so very many times on this forum and that there's really NO need to wonder!!!** Rich! Extra RIIIIICH! Well, I WAS hoping that a REAL breeder or two might join in the discussion as to damage untold that antibreeder - and antibreed - legislation is having and will continue have even more so on the future of the purebred dog in this country ... but alas ... it seems only the ignorant wish to come out and play.**sigh** And this is yet another prime example of why I rarely come to this board and why this place is dead ... I mean, really, it's a sad state of affairs when THIS is what passes as thought-provoking conversation here: simply more nonsensical drivel from the QUALITY breeders Myakka and Norma ... Myakka the MUTT breeder and Norma the "champion" of the PROFIT-DRIVEN MILLER! 'Nuff said! Why even waste one's time? Sometimes, like the past 24 hours or so, I think, well, go ahead and post, just maybe someone who might actually WANT to do the right thing but just doesn't know how will stop by and read something from a QUALITY, RESPONSIBLE BREEDER and LEARN and GROW; and there's still a chance that happens and those people simply are not posting ... but this is just beyond ridiculous. FOR THOSE OF US WHO LOVE OUR BREED THE CONCERN IS NOT ABOUT PERSONAL LOSS OR GAIN PEOPLE - IT IS ABOUT THE ANIMALS AND FUTURE OF PUREBRED DOGS! SHEESH! Thankfully, I do know other quality fanciers who truly CARE about their dogs and the future of their BREED(s) and don't just see them as EXPERIMENTS (oh, let's let our mutt have a litter of pups so the kids can see the "miracle of life" - groan!) and DOLLAR SIGNS or I would feel utterly alone in my passion if all I had was this place! Still I do tend to get a bit discouraged when I see so clearly the true state of most of the human race. This world just doesn't have a chance with so much ignorance and special interest blindness (not to mention spiritual and moral bankruptcy!) procreating and raising up future generations. No it's not a crime to be ignorant but maybe it should be like getting drunk ... it's okay if you do it in the privacy of your own home but if you are going to operate a computer keyboard on the "information highway" there should be fines involved! It is a terribly upside down world where all must have a license to breed a companion animal but anybody - including serial killers and no matter how insane or lacking in parental skills or knowledge - can breed and bear children! Too bad people don't have to obtain breeding licenses before they can reproduce! Mandatory spay/neuter of certain people seems like a very good idea indeed!! BTW, LMBOPMP is Laughing My Butt Off Peeing My Pants - something I would do a lot more of if the ripple effects of the utter ignorance and greed of some were not so far reaching and negative and often heartbreaking. Like I said before, Hunte Corporation is laughing all the way to the bank with every new piece of antibreeder legislation passed. Big money is behind this movement. And GREED is NEVER a good thing when it comes to the welfare of animals. Stick a fork in this conversation, it's done! Mutt and for profit breeders were always a problem with this forum but they do seem to have completely taken over this place and it's next to impossible to have a serious conversation with a serious breeder here ... |
|||
|
|
Good Pluba |
I am not well versed with this issue, but what many have glossed over is, most reputable show breeders are not licensed. Most only have 1 to 3 litters every 3 years.
Once the foot is in the door, where does it stop? I'm not sure which side of the fence I stand on at the moment as I have not researched this bill as closely as I probably should. Mya, again your post shows me how you say one thing, yet do another. Some are here because they hope to make a difference, others like to roll around in the feces. You'll be able to "sniff them out" in no time. -DJ's Doxies, |
|||
|
|
Good Pluba |
Exactly ... for example IF this were REALLY about the ANIMALS and not being driven by millers like Hunte and a foot in the door by AR dementos, here's a perfectly LOGICAL solution: Mandatory microchipping of ALL animals would PROVE where abandoned or surrendered dogs are coming from and force those who are actually responsible for them to step up to the place (thus TRULY finding the target audience - irresponsible pet owners and breeders) and still manages to leave the choice of spay/neuter where it belongs and is rightfully held - with the animal's owner! |
|||
|
|
Newba Pluba |
It is already mandatory where I am. This may stop people from dumping their dogs on the street, and help reunite lost dogs with their owners, however it is still perfectly legal to dump dogs at the shelters and the chip does not prevent them from breeding indiscriminately. It also does not tell the AC who the breeder is. MC would not help in that case. Although, in my area, all pups must be chipped as well by the breeder. Not only that, but the breeder have to notify the AC whenever they have a litter and who got what. This made many angry because they can no longer hide the income they receive from their pups. there is an official written declaration of how many pups you sold for the tax man can see. Microchiping is good step in the right direction, but it is not enough. The only way it would do real good is if the breeder is licensed. Otherwise, there is no way to enforce it unless the AC happens to stumble on the unlicensed breeder. But then all they get is a slap on the wrist. With out the stiff penalties this bill provides, people have no incentive to comply. No matter what anyone says, it always boils down to money. This is the main reason people are either for it or against it. Depend on what side you are, this bill will either cost you money or make you money. It is either fees you will have to pay, money you would have to spend to comply, money you would lose from loss of income if you can't comply, money you would be forced to pay in taxes on the "non-existing profit" you were able to hide until now or the whole lot more money you would make with no competition around. That is right no matter what anyone says, money is a big motivator, no matter who you are. Money makes the world go around. |
|||
|
|
Good Pluba |
Hu I understand the confusion as I did breed Tinker. However I have not always agreed with getting pets fixed. It has only been in the last several years that I have changed my tune on the subject. I was young and stupid now I am growing and learning. I won't say I made a mistake breeding Tinker as I have 3 beautiful pups from her. I will say I understand were everyone was coming from on the subject and That was my last pet litter ever. As far as this bill is concerned I went back and read it again last night. I see where the only ones that can get the the permits must prove their animals are registered with one of the places such as AKC, CKC ect. I think I seen some where that it is also limited on how many litters a year. Which to me says that puppy mills would not benefit from this bill. I will be looking at it closer tonight. Hu ~ one more note that I thought of last night. The chances of me breeding Tinkerbell if we had a law like that would have been zero. Therefor although I did breed her against many people telling me I shouldn't, I would not have if there had been such a law in place, she would have been fixed well before I had even thought of it. I follow the law. |
|||
|
|
Pluba Freshman |
Mya you better register with your local USDA and microchip all your chickens then;
http://nonais.org/ http://www.amerpoultryassn.com/savehobby.htm http://www.amerpoultryassn.com/Why%20You%20Should%20Oppose.doc |
|||
|
|
Newba Pluba |
So I keep hearing, but I have yet to meet one in the real world. From my vast experience, they are all hypocrites. Yes, I know, another generalization. |
|||
|
|
Good Pluba |
I know some hypocrites who I label a "Glorified Mill," but you know what they say......"Birds of a feather........." I'm sorry to hear your world is absent of my peers. Sincerely. Some are here because they hope to make a difference, others like to roll around in the feces. You'll be able to "sniff them out" in no time. -DJ's Doxies, |
|||
|