Thanks, Donna. I can address the issues specifically related to Shelby county without help. I’m actually relieved that you don’t think mentioning HSUS is a good idea, because I was not comfortable with writing about that. As to what’s fueling it, I don’t believe that we know. What they say is fueling it is ONE complaint from ONE family about someone who is raising rotties next door to them in deplorable conditions where they have to listen to barking dogs all the time and smell the waste. However, even the guy who presented the change to the planning commission admitted that if this is approved, the only relief it will offer is that the county can make the man move his dogs 75 feet off the property line—not much of a remedy! From: accmemberdiscussion-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:accmemberdiscussion-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Djsdosido@xxxxxxx Sent: Friday, October 01, 2010 3:03 PM To: accmemberdiscussion@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: [accmemberdiscussion] Re: Shelby County Commissioners' letter Actually, I don't think it's a good idea to bring the HSUS/PETA subject in to the discussion. As far as I can tell from what information I've read, there is no reason to think that AR philosophy is fueling this. I think just sticking to the subject at hand, i.e. the Commission trying to control animal nuisance problems through zoning and us wanting to create a fair, equitable definition of the term "commercial" which doesn't include hobbyists. Really and truly, I am still not very clear on exactly WHAT the Commission wants this definition to do. What are they trying to achieve by this ordinance? Until that's known, it's practically impossible to offer good alternative solutions to whatever they perceive the problem(s) to be. If you go back and look at the email that I sent several weeks ago to the BKC list about the questions & discrepancies the ordinance brings up for me, it might help you pinpoint a couple of bullets to include. If you'd like to call me, we can sort of go through some of the things you might want to ask or point out. 680-3336. Honestly, one of the first things I'd do is make a phone call to Mr. Dillard, (I believe that's his name) the commissioner that got the whole thing derailed 5 years ago when it came up the first time. Isn't he still on the Commission? He probably could give some insight as to what's happened in the last 5 years and if he still feels opposed to it now as he did then. And if not, why not? Donna & the Dosido Gang Remlap, Alabama Visit me at www.doublenickellife.blogspot.com <http://www.doublenickellife.blogspot.com/> and help support the Alabama Canine Coalition by shopping/searching through http://www.goodsearch.com <http://www.goodsearch.com/> and http://www.igive.com <http://www.igive.com/> Every year of dog love is worth seven years of the human stuff. (Michael Rosen) In a message dated 10/1/2010 1:41:25 P.M. Central Daylight Time, ilcrice@xxxxxxxxxxxxx writes: I know, Donna, and that is the trouble I am having with writing my letter. There are so many points that could be made. I’m trying to decide whether it would be beneficial or not to include, as an introduction, a bit of information on HSUS and/or PETA as an explanation of why our concern level is so high. If you think this would be a good idea, or if you have suggestions along this line, please send them to me. I have plenty of info to write about the specifics of this Shelby county case, but feel a bit incompetent to explain HSUS to those who may know nothing about it. From: accmemberdiscussion-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:accmemberdiscussion-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Djsdosido@xxxxxxx Sent: Friday, October 01, 2010 1:18 PM To: accmemberdiscussion@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: [accmemberdiscussion] Re: Shelby County Commissioners' letter Thanks, Ivy. The PUPS letter took a pretty good chunk of time to put together just because there are SO MANY points you could make. Choosing which ones and how to put it together coherently was a little more involved..........LOL. Here is another copy of the letter that was sent to the Planning Commission. Damon, I think if you just take out the Planning Commissioners' names and insert the County Commissioners' names, it will be just fine to send. Of course, change the date and you may have to change that case number....... I don't know. Frankly, I'm not sure what else I could say about the whole subject without sounding redundant or confusing. I'm surprised to hear that this is coming before the Commission so quickly. That doesn't sound too good for our side. They want to get something done fast. Also, I hate that the meeting is at 8:30 on a Monday morning. I have a new job that I'm not sure when the start date is yet. I had assumed that the meeting would be at night again......most usually are. Do you know if any of the other BKC Shelby County residents can be there? Donna & the Dosido Gang Remlap, Alabama Visit me at www.doublenickellife.blogspot.com <http://www.doublenickellife.blogspot.com/> and help support the Alabama Canine Coalition by shopping/searching through http://www.goodsearch.com <http://www.goodsearch.com/> and http://www.igive.com <http://www.igive.com/> Every year of dog love is worth seven years of the human stuff. (Michael Rosen) In a message dated 10/1/2010 11:07:08 A.M. Central Daylight Time, ilcrice@xxxxxxxxxxxxx writes: Donna, I like your PUPS letter. Damon or Donna, could one of you send me a copy of Donna’s letter to the planning commission. From: accmemberdiscussion-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:accmemberdiscussion-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Damon Folmar Sent: Friday, October 01, 2010 10:02 AM To: accmemberdiscussion@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: [accmemberdiscussion] Re: PUPS letter to Rep. Robert Aderholt We can...I can probably copy & paste it & address it to the commission. I had in mind the same letter, just addressed to different people. I did forward it to a few of the commissioners but not the entire commission. I can just do that if you want. Damon -----Original Message----- From: Djsdosido@xxxxxxx To: accmemberdiscussion@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Sent: Fri, Oct 1, 2010 7:57 am Subject: [accmemberdiscussion] Re: PUPS letter to Rep. Robert Aderholt I'll be glad to, Damon, but I thought you had already sent the one I wrote to the Planning Commissioners on to the County Commissioners. If you didn't, then I suppose we could just use that one. Don't you think? Please let us know how your meeting with Corley Ellis goes. Donna & the Dosido Gang Remlap, Alabama Visit me at www.doublenickellife.blogspot.com <http://www.doublenickellife.blogspot.com/> and help support the Alabama Canine Coalition by shopping/searching through http://www.goodsearch.com <http://www.goodsearch.com/> and http://www.igive.com <http://www.igive.com/> Every year of dog love is worth seven years of the human stuff. (Michael Rosen) In a message dated 10/1/2010 3:36:05 A.M. Central Daylight Time, jdfolmar@xxxxxxx writes: It was a great letter. Donna--would you mind doing an ACC letter to the Shelby County county commission prior to their meeting on Monday morning at 8:30 on October 11? I plan to do one as well as have a face to face meeting with Corley Ellis prior to the 11th. The more letters and input we can have ahead of time the better. If anyone wants to go to the meeting it's in Columbiana 10/11 at 8:30 and they will vote on this issue and then meet with the Planning Commission thereafter. Anyone who goes will only have 3 minutes to speak, so I think while it's important that we have people there it's more important to adequately express our views ahead of time. Thanks! Damon -----Original Message----- From: Baba Monk <babamonk@xxxxxxx> To: accmemberdiscussion@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Sent: Thu, Sep 30, 2010 11:07 pm Subject: [accmemberdiscussion] Re: PUPS letter to Rep. Robert Aderholt Great letter Donna. Thanks! Baba On Sep 30, 2010, at 4:08 PM, temujinjk@xxxxxxx wrote: Well done, Donna! Judith -----Original Message----- From: Djsdosido@xxxxxxx To: accmemberdiscussion@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Sent: Thu, Sep 30, 2010 3:57 pm Subject: [accmemberdiscussion] PUPS letter to Rep. Robert Aderholt This is the letter that I just sent via email to Robert Aderholt regarding his sponsorship of the PUPS legislation. I am sharing it with you so if you want to use it as a guideline to send one of your own or to get friends and family living in the 4th District to send one. It is VERY important that Congressman Aderholt understand that there are MANY of his constituents opposed to his position on PUPS. Please take the time to write yourself and to encourage others to do the same. Baba has already sent talking points to use earlier today. There are many to choose from......you don't have to include all of them. Please feel free to crosspost to those who can help. I will be sending it to some terrier folks I know in North Alabama. September 30, 2010 Representative Robert B. Aderholt 1433 Longworth House Office Building Washington, DC 20515 RE: The Puppy Uniform Protection and Safety Act (PUPS) HR 5434 and S 3424 Dear Representative Aderholt: As an active voter in your Congressional district, I am writing to you regarding my concern for your support of the abovementioned bill. Please remove your sponsorship from this bill. Although I voted for you in the past election, I will be unable to support you further if you continue your sponsorship. Furthermore, I will urge friends, relatives and professional contacts to refrain from supporting you as well. I have been active in, with and for dogs for over fifteen years. I have shown and trained my own dogs and helped others with theirs. I know many very responsible, very ethical hobby breeders of several different breeds of dogs. All of the dog people I know will be negatively affected by this piece of legislation should it pass. There are almost 75 million dogs owned in the United States. Many of those have come from the very segment of the dog breeding population this bill would injure, as it would affect all breeders who sell directly to the public, including show, hobby and working dog breeders. There are so many spurious, ill-advised and ambiguous elements to the bill that I hardly know where to begin to point them out. So, I will give only these few as examples: 1. PUPS creates a new category of breeder: the “High Volume Retail Breeder” who would be required to be licensed by the USDA under the Animal Welfare Act/AWA. This breeder is defined as anyone who, “in commerce, for compensation or profit – (i)has an ownership interest in or custody of ONE (1) or more breeding female dogs; and (ii) sells or offers for sale, via ANY MEANS OF CONVEYANCE (including the Internet, telephone, or newspaper), more than 50 of the offspring of such breeding female dogs for use as pets in any 1-year period. In addition, “breeding female dog” is defined as “an intact female dog aged 4 months or older”. Obviously, a 4 month-old female dog isn’t physiologically mature enough to be bred. Nor can one female dog produce 50 puppies in one year. But the PUPS’ definition of “HVR breeder” designates 4 month-old puppies as being intact and breedable. Intact, yes; breedable, no. Furthermore, the “50 offspring” aren’t defined by age, or as being from litters owned by the breeder, or even as being personally owned by the breeder. This very vague term includes everything from puppies, young adults, spayed dogs, older retired dogs, previously placed dogs returned to the breeder and then rehomed, etc. And if the breeder should have telephone discussions with possible prospective dog buyers regarding any planned litters, this would be counted towards the sale of “50 offspring” required for licensing whether or not there was actual consummation of any sale. 2. If PUPS should pass, it would increase the need for many more Animal Plant and Health Inspection Service/APHIS inspectors, yet there is no increase of inspectors reflected in the bill’s text. Additionally, there is nothing in this bill that changes the status of already known substandard kennel violators. New sources of funding would be needed to administer the currently unfunded bill’s mandate. Without funding, expanded enforcement and inspections couldn’t be done and those facilities requiring extra inspections would slip under the radar. Considering the sorry state of the nation’s economy and the huge budget deficits under the Obama administration, funding would be improbable, if not impossible, to get. And what good is any piece of legislation if it can’t be carried out? Congressman, again, I urge you to reconsider your sponsorship of this bill. The unintended consequences would be punitive and far-reaching in the world of purebred dogs bred by hobbyists. Sincerely, Donna P. Noland, Member The Birmingham Kennel Club (www.birminghamkc.org <http://www.birminghamkc.org/> ) The Airedale Club of America (www.airedale.org <http://www.airedale.org/> ) The Scottish Terrier Club of America (www.stca.org <http://www.stca.org/> ) The Atlanta Terrier Club (www.atlantaterrierclub.org <http://www.atlantaterrierclub.org/> ) The Alabama Canine Coalition, Inc. (www.alabamacaninecoalition.org <http://www.alabamacaninecoalition.org/> ) The American Dog Owners Association (www.adoa.org <http://www.adoa.org/> ) Donna & the Dosido Gang Remlap, Alabama Visit me at www.doublenickellife.blogspot.com <http://www.doublenickellife.blogspot.com/> and help support the Alabama Canine Coalition by shopping/searching through http://www.goodsearch.com <http://www.goodsearch.com/> and http://www.igive.com <http://www.igive.com/> Every year of dog love is worth seven years of the human stuff. (Michael Rosen) =