[ SHOWGSD-L ] From a non-dog person....a good read///long
- From: Stormy435@xxxxxxx
- To: showgsd-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2005 15:41:57 EDT
From another list:
> Message: 1
> Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2005 09:40:43 -0700
> From: "Lee Mctaggart" <delayre@...>
> Subject: PAWS Again
>
> Hello This was on my Fox Terrier Group
>
> Subject: PAWS Again
>
>
> I apologize for this being a bit long, but I feel it is very important
> to get this message out. There are some points here that have not been
> made elsewhere. Please feel free to cross post if you wish.
>
> After reviewing a number of people's opinions and interpretations of the
> PAWS act and feeling that I was not getting an totally unbiased
> viewpoint of the possible impact this legislation could have on the dog
> and cat fanciers, I decided to run it by my brother-in-law who spent his
> career in the government sector and is quite knowledgeable about federal
> legislation. He headed up the plastics division of the FDA which
> regulates all the plastic food containers manufactured in this country.
> In the course of his work, he dealt directly with legislators,
> lobbyists, major corporations, federal administrators, and the state
> department. Upon retiring from the FDA, he took a position as a
> consultant with an international law firm based in Brussels, Belgium to
> serve as a liaison to the U.S. government.
>
>
> His first reaction when I explained the PAWS act to him was 'Oh no, is
> DDAL at it again? They've been doing this since the early 90's'. Now
> mind you, my brother-in-law isn't a dog or cat fancier but he is very
> aware of the animal rights groups. He went on to say that PETA has
> officially been declared a "terrorist" group in Europe (he and my sister
> lived in Brussels for 3 years) because of their known ties to various
> terrorist groups. Not only that, the FBI has PETA, HSUS, DDAL, etc.
> under surveillance for the same reason. He refers to these groups as
> people-haters not animal lovers and they are not looked upon with great
> favor in Washington, D.C.
>
>
> In regards to the criteria to define a dealer or public retail
> establishment of more than 6 litters or 25 puppies and no more than $500
> annual income from the sale of other animals, he had this to say. The
> government would interpret that rule as 6 litters or 25 puppies which
> ever comes first. It does not mean you can have 6 litters with more
> than 25 puppies nor does it mean you can have 7 litters of 1 puppy each
> - in either case you would be considered to be a dealer or a public
> retail establishment. As to the $500 limit on the sales of other
> animals, that could be a considerable "gotcha" as "other animals" is not
> adequately defined.
>
>
> Another catch in this act is the term "personal use" and how it relates
> to the selling of dogs or cats. If you sell a puppy to another
> individual as a pet or show prospect for their own use, that is ok. If
> that person, in turn, sells the puppy because it did not work out, you
> could possibly be classified as a dealer as the original buyer did not
> keep the puppy for their own personal use but sold it to another
> individual.
>
>
> My brother-in-law brought up a point regarding the USDA that no one else
> has in this debate. The USDA, as a federal agency, only regulates those
> dealers/public retail establishments that sell animals or animal
> products that are shipped across state lines. If a dealer or retail
> establishment sells only within a state, they will fall under the
> jurisdiction of that state. So how does this affect a breeder? If a
> breeder sells a puppy to an individual that resides in the same state
> the USDA will have no jurisdiction in that case. If a breeder sells a
> puppy to an individual who resides in another state but the sale is
> transacted in the breeder's state (i.e. the puppy is picked up within
> the breeder's state), the USDA will have no jurisdiction. Now, if a
> breeder sells a puppy to an individual in another state and the puppy
> either shipped or picked up by the buyer in the buyer's state, the USDA
> will have jurisdiction since it crossed state lines. In this last case,
> the breeder is considered a dealer regardless of how many dogs they own
> or have bred in a given time frame. This is a critical issue as this
> will affect almost all serious breeders as they routinely sell puppies
> across state lines.
>
>
> I am sure most of you are aware that the USDA really doesn't want to go
> into private homes and do inspections nor do they have the manpower or
> budget to do so. I asked my brother-in-law what would the USDA do if
> this legislation passes? He said they would probably subcontract the
> inspections out at the state level and they could be lucrative
> contracts. Since AKC already has people across the country doing
> record/kennel inspections, would it be too big of a stretch to think
> that AKC would like to get some, if not all, of these contracts?
>
>
> In summation, my brother-in-law felt the main purpose of this act was
> for the animal activists to get a foot in the door to further their
> political agenda and to set a new legal precedence for determining what
> constitutes a public retail establishment or dealer (individuals selling
> from private residences) when it comes to breeding animals. He thinks
> this act is not really enforceable since there are no procedures in
> place to track what individuals are breeding dogs/cats in the private
> sector and to enforce the stated limits. He felt the current Animal
> Welfare Act combined with local ordinances concerning noise, health and
> sanitation, and zoning were sufficient to deal with any problems arising
> from bad breeders. If PAWS becomes law, it will affect the vast
> majority of breeders not just the 4% stated by AKC.
>
>
> Ellen Gehm
>
> On Que Fox Terriers
>
> Lee McTaggart
> delayre@...
*^*\/\/\/\/*^**^*\/\/\/\/*^**^*\/\/\/\/*^*
Dog's love is different, it requires no return
www.FairhopeGSD.com
============================================================================
POST is Copyrighted 2005. All material remains the property of the original
author and of GSD Communication, Inc. NO REPRODUCTIONS or FORWARDS of any kind
are permitted without prior permission of the original author AND of the
Showgsd-l Management. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
ALL PERSONS ARE ON NOTICE THAT THE FORWARDING, REPRODUCTION OR USE IN ANY
MANNER OF ANY MATERIAL WHICH APPEARS ON SHOWGSD-L WITHOUT THE EXPRESS
PERMISSION OF ALL PARTIES TO THE POST AND THE LIST MANAGEMENT IS EXPRESSLY
FORBIDDEN, AND IS A VIOLATION OF LAW. VIOLATORS OF THIS PROHIBITION WILL BE
PROSECUTED.
For assistance, please contact the List Management at admin@xxxxxxxxxxxx
VISIT OUR WEBSITE - http://www.showgsd.org
============================================================================
Other related posts:
- » [ SHOWGSD-L ] From a non-dog person....a good read///long
