[ SHOWGSD-L ] H2669 amending 2132 and S1139, "PAWS"
- From: Pinehillgsds@xxxxxxx
- To: pmick@xxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2005 08:07:40 EDT
In a message dated 6/29/2005 9:07:57 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
pmick@xxxxxxxxx writes:
Here is the EXACT language as proposed in the Bill: (note the OR)
> `(ii) any person who, during any calendar year--
>
> `(I)(aa) sells not more than 25 dogs or
> cats at wholesale or to the public; or
>
> `(bb) does not whelp more than 6 litters
> of dogs or cats and sells only dogs or
> cats bred or raised on the premises of
> the person directly at retail to persons
> who purchase such animals for their own
> use and enjoyment and not for resale; and
>
> `(II) derives not more than $500 gross
> income from the sale of other animals;';
> and
>
You've listed the exemptions. You are exempt IF you meet any of the tree
criteria above. I see where the confusion is coming from; there are two bills,
Senate Bill 1139 and House Bill 2669. The later includes only the proposed
changes (amendments) to House Bill 2132. It would be (MUCH!) easier reading
if each time they amended it, they would re-do the entire thing instead of
saying "strike this", "insert that", which is why I found the AKC's analysis
of
the legislation is so helpful.
_http://www.akc.org/news/index.cfm?article_id=2525_
(http://www.akc.org/news/index.cfm?article_id=2525)
Still, I didn't take their word for it, I read the bills, striking and
inserting <G>. You have to combine the House and Senate Bills, taking the most
recent set of proposals then comparing it to the previous bill to get the jist
of it:) You are exempt if you meet ONE of the criteria above. Honest:)
You write "and who's to say that, once in
place, these regs won't have the numbers changed in a year or two?"
They'd have to start all over again w/ a bills in both the Senate and House
and then reach a compromise between the two. Not impossible, but tedious.
Currently, IF the USDA chose to use/enforce the correct definition of "retail
pet store" which is how hobby breeders are currently staying out of trouble,
there wouldn't need to be legislation and hobby breeders would IMO be in a
world of hurt.
(How did hobby breeders get lumped in w/ retail stores anyway???? I'm not a
retail store!)
I still make the point that State and local laws will, in most areas, kick
in way before the pending PAWS (federal) legislation.
Back to insurance for me:) I thought THAT was tedious until I started
reading the aforementioned bills!
Kathy
three generations of Dual Titled Champions live here!
visit _Pine Hill German Shepherd Dogs_
(http://www.geocities.com/pinehillgsds/)
============================================================================
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 ] H2669 amending 2132 and S1139, "PAWS"
