[ SHOWGSD-L ] Re: NO PAWS, NO PUPPY PROTECTION

  • From: Stormy435@xxxxxxx
  • To: showgsd-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 13:51:45 EST

This applies to PAWS exactly!   Just change the Bill Number to 1139 and 
change a word here and there, and there it is.   They are just adding more to 
the 
PPA that was defeated soundly.   We can't relax, they (the "THEY" that are 
behind the effort), are constantly looking for laizzez faire and apathy for 
that 
back door that is open.
Stormy

In a message dated 1/24/06 11:43:34 AM, wynsum@xxxxxxx writes:


> 
>     We are all monitoring this legislation closely and will be contacting 
> your office later to record
>     your vote regarding Senate Amendment 2496.  Animal rights extremists are 
> in a very  small
>     minority as the majority of your constituents eat hot dogs and ice cream 
> and enjoy an
>     occasional visit to the zoo, circus and rodeo.  I do  hope you will also 
> support the multitude of
>     pet owners in this country who
>     derive physical and mental benefits from pet ownership and not support 
> legislation which
>     would support the agenda of this radical cult-like  movement.           
>    
>     Limited space doesn't allow me to go into the provisions of the bill 
> except to say that USDA is
>     already inspecting commercial breeding facilities.  Most of the 
> substandard facilities are not
>     licensed.  We support the enforcement of the Animal Welfare Act by USDA 
> but see no need
>     for these provisions which will do nothing to benefit animals.          
>   
>    
>     The agenda is obvious and we ask you to oppose adding Senate Amendment 
> 2496 to the
>     Farm Bill. I appreciate your valuable taking the time to read this 
> letter. please do not hesitate to
>     contact me regarding this or other animal legislation at any time.
>    
>     I oppose PPA amendment to the Farm Bill because it broadens the scope of 
> the Animal
>     Welfare Act to govern the breeding of dogs and socialization 
> requirements. The rigid penalty
>     provisions of the PPA leave no flexibility for the USDA to properly 
> enforce the Act.
>    
> The Puppy Protection Act (S 1478) is bad in concepts, period. The USDA 
> should stop encouring the
> AMISH to slap dogs to gether to make money and leave breeding to the small 
> breeders.  If you want to
> stop puppy mills - stop the pet shops from selling pure bred dogs and stop 
> the encouragement of the
> AMISH.
> 
> 





Stormy Hope
*~~*~~*~~*~~*~~*~~*~~*~~*~~*~~*
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: