Maybe the appropriate action would be to contact the Legislators and ask for refinement of this bill to address areas of concern. I become nervous when we automatically oppose every piece of legislation that has the word dog in it. Pretty soon they are going to quit listening all together. We should support good bills and find a way to work with folks that actually have the right idea, just need more input to make it better. Dee From: Peggy <pmick12@xxxxxxxxxxx> To: daryllauffer@xxxxxxxxxxx Subject: Re: [ SHOWGSD-L ] Re: Montana Bill 726 Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2007 12:25:45 -0500 I agree with you, Dee, and I think the bill is meant to address cruelty and not breeders of purebred animals. Still, all too often it is the breeders are the ones who get caught up in the enforcement of such laws. I believe that the bill does not define cruelty, or who is to decide whether the person is a hoarder or just someone with a lot of animals. Personally I am suspicious of any legislation that establishes a figure for the number of animals an individual may own because historically, those numbers are lowered...and without definitions, the very fact that such laws exist can be turned against anyone. This was one of the problems with the PAWS bill. In this case, if a person had 3 dogs, a cat, two birds, and two children with pet hamsters or guinea pigs, that person would be a person of interest to law enforcement. Overall, it does seem not to be such a threatening piece of legislation, however. Peggy Daryl Lauffer wrote: Ginger had sent us a link for a Montana Bill 726. Please note that bill has made it out of committee so if you disagree with is you need to act quickly. It now goes back to the House to be voted on. Here is a link for a list of all the members of the House of Representatives: http://leg.mt.gov/css/sessions/60th/roster.asp?HouseID=1&SessionID=91 I will say that I read this bill and there are some good parts to it. They are also addressing the issue of transportation and shelter in evacuation type emergencies. I can't say that I see where the hoarding definition is a bad one. It is more than just "10 dogs and your a horder" it also says over 10 and not caring for them etc. I copied this from the Bill itself: 5) As used in this section, the following definitions apply: (a) "Companion animal hoarding" means: (i) possession of 10 or more companion animals or household pets; (ii) failure or inability to provide the necessary care for the animals in violation of subsection (1)(c); (iii) confining the animals in a severely overcrowded environment; and (iv) inability to recognize or understand the nature of or having a reckless disregard for the conditions under which the animals are living and the deleterious impact those conditions have on the health and well-being of the animals and the owner. Maybe I'm not seeing something that others are, but it doesn't look that bad to me. Dee Lauffer _________________________________________________________________ Don?t miss your chance to WIN 10 hours of private jet travel from Microsoft® Office Live http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/mcrssaub0540002499mrt/direct/01/ ============================================================================ POST is Copyrighted 2007. 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 - www.showgsd.org ============================================================================