[ SHOWGSD-L ] Re: Dog breeding in these times
- From: "Stormy V. Hope" <stormy435@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: blackhawkfarms214 <blackhawkfarms214@xxxxxxxxx>, Showgsd-l GSDList <showgsd-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2015 09:28:40 -0800
What people don’t understand, is this has been the regulations for many years
now. They just went in and redefined, tightened up, moved it up in importance.
When I got involved (way back in the early 90’s) the regulations were that you
could breed domestic small animals for breeding purposes, working, herding,
etc. But if you were breeding for pets, even then, you could only avoid
licensing if you had THREE or less breeding animals.
People just ignored it. The internet came. Animal rights people became more
vocal and rabid. and Congress members started writing laws that scared us.
Remember PAWS, PUPS, PUPS 2 and 3?
These regulations that had public comments (people didn’t hear the yells to
comment), and the regs were published and promulgated.
We’re not finished. AKC and NAIA and others pushed some Congress members to
write some relaxation of the regs in last year’s Farm Bill. We’re waiting to
see how APHIS will handle that. Hopefully, the amendments to the regulations
will get out sooner than later.
Storm
> On Jan 23, 2015, at 8:48 AM, Stormy V. Hope <Stormy435@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Another change that breeders are making is stating on their websites that
> they do not ship. And they state if their champions are no longer on their
> premises, do not post litter announcements. They put their program of
> breeding for working or preservation on their websites. They make it clear
> that co-owned or dogs held for growing out for show possibilities do not live
> on premises.
>
> Do read my next Review Legislation article.
>
> Storm
>
>
>> On Jan 23, 2015, at 8:10 AM, Stormy V. Hope <Stormy435@xxxxxxxxx
>> <mailto:Stormy435@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
>>
>> From the many who have been discussing this on Facebook and other chat
>> lists, here has been some who have changed their manner of selling or cut
>> back on intact females,
>>
>> BUT
>>
>> For the most part, most non-commercial breeders already conform to the basic
>> tenet of meeting the buyer before or at purchase
>>
>> OR
>>
>> Selling the pups only as a breeding working or hunting dogs, with a few
>> exceptions.
>>
>> (commercial meaning those breeders who make most or a large part of their
>> income from breeding and selling dogs)
>>
>> And check my next legislation article in the February Review.
>>
>> Storm
>>
>>> On Jan 23, 2015, at 6:18 AM, blackhawkfarms214 <blackhawkfarms214@xxxxxxxxx
>>> <mailto:blackhawkfarms214@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Question for those on the list. With the new ordinances and pressure from
>>> the AR activist, how has it affected your breeding program? Are you
>>> adhering to licensing guidelines for your county? Have you chose to move to
>>> areas where it isn't so strict? I remember a few months back the young lady
>>> on the list who went to court over selling/breeding puppies a few months
>>> back and have noticed a few other cases popping up across the country. Of
>>> course, pvt replies are welcomed.
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>> Mike
>>>
>>
>> Stormy V. Hope
>> https://www.facebook.com/GSDCA.LegislationAwareness
>> <https://www.facebook.com/GSDCA.LegislationAwareness>
>> https://www.facebook.com/CaRPOC.CaliforniaResponsiblePetOwnersCoalition
>> <https://www.facebook.com/CaRPOC.CaliforniaResponsiblePetOwnersCoalition>
>>
>>
>>
>
> Stormy V. Hope
> https://www.facebook.com/GSDCA.LegislationAwareness
> <https://www.facebook.com/GSDCA.LegislationAwareness>
> https://www.facebook.com/CaRPOC.CaliforniaResponsiblePetOwnersCoalition
> <https://www.facebook.com/CaRPOC.CaliforniaResponsiblePetOwnersCoalition>
>
>
>
Stormy V. Hope
https://www.facebook.com/GSDCA.LegislationAwareness
https://www.facebook.com/CaRPOC.CaliforniaResponsiblePetOwnersCoalition
Other related posts:
