[ SHOWGSD-L ] !!!!PUPS Bill Reintroduced In U.S. Congress !!!! VERY long, but PLEASE read.
- From: Stormy Hope <Stormy435@xxxxxxx>
- To: The List <showgsd-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2010 08:32:41 -0700
Please, everybody, this WILL affect you and we all have to contact our
Federal Legislator NOW, to alert them that this bill is NOT in dogs
best interest. Read this thoroughly. You'll be hearing much more on
this, but if we act early (politely and respectfully, staying to the
issues), it won't get passed.
Thanks
Stormy Hope
Action Alert from PIJAC
PUPS Bill Reintroduced In U.S. Congress
** Animal Welfare Act To Be Amended **
The Issue.
Senator Richard J. Durbin (D-IL) and Representative Samuel S. Farr (D-
CA) introduced companion bills in the Senate and House of
Representatives, respectively, titled the Puppy Uniform Protection and
Safety Act (PUPS). This legislation amending the Animal Welfare Act
(AWA), which was introduced in similar form in the 110th Congress,
would modify the current retail exemption relative to "high volume
breeders" and incorporate new requirements for the exercise of dogs,
including facility standards for exercise areas. In introducing the
bill, Senator Durbin specifically pointed to the recently released
USDA Inspector General's report addressing AWA enforcement by the
federal agency, saying the bill "will close the loophole that allows
large breeders to sell puppies online, escaping inspection and
oversight." Although there are no reliable figures as to the extent
of puppy sales online in the United States, such sales have been
raised as a concern in recent years.
The Impact.
When the AWA was first amended to regulate pet dealers, an exemption
for pet retailers was included in the law. This exemption has stood
for 40 years, notwithstanding other amendments to the Act. Subject to
limited exceptions, persons who breed and sell warm-blooded animals as
pets at wholesale are required to be licensed with the Animal and
Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS), while those selling such
animals to the public (as retailers) are not. If PUPS is adopted into
law, this longstanding retail exemption would for the first time be
modified in the federal statute to bring a certain group of retailers
under the AWA. Specifically, anyone qualifying as a "high volume
retail breeder" would be required to become licensed and be subject to
applicable provisions of the AWA.
Under PUPS, a high volume retail breeder is defined as any person
"who, in commerce, for compensation or profit,
(i) has an ownership interest in or custody of 1 or more breeding
female dogs; and
(ii) sells or offers for sale, via any means of conveyance (including
the Internet, telephone, or newspaper), more than 50 of the offspring
of such breeding female dogs for use as pets in any 1-year period."
A "breeding female dog" for purposes of the Act is defined as "an
intact female dog aged 4 months or older." The bill provides that
anyone qualifying as a high volume retail breeder is a dealer under
the AWA and explicitly states that the retail pet store exemption
under the Act does not apply to these people.
The high volume retail breeder provision is being painted as a way of
closing the "loophole" that allows breeders to sell directly to the
public via the Internet. When the retail exemption was first
established, of course, there were no internet sales. That exemption
was placed into the Act because the focus was on regulation of
breeders who are not subject to public exposure. Those who buy pets,
as well as members of the public generally, routinely frequent retail
stores and readily observe the conditions under which these animals
are kept. Furthermore, pet stores are often regulated under state
law. Those who sell exclusively through the internet, though, do not
have facilities that are frequented by the public and state laws
regulating pet stores do not necessarily apply to them. It is
important to note, though, that this bill is not targeting internet
sellers per se - the high volume retail breeder definition covers
breeders regardless of how they sell animals.
This bill also amends requirements for exercise of dogs by anyone
licensed under the Act. Dealers would be required to report on their
original license or renewal application the number of dogs exempted
from exercise pursuant to a veterinarian's determination and USDA
would have to adopt new exercise standards that include the
requirement for all dogs at least 12 weeks of age (except female dogs
with unweaned puppies) to have daily exercise that allows the dog:
(i) to move sufficiently to develop or maintain normal muscle tone and
mass as appropriate for the age, breed, sex, and reproductive status
of the dog; and
(ii) the ability to achieve a running stride; and
(iii) is not a forced activity (other than a forced activity used for
veterinary treatment) or other physical activity that is repetitive,
restrictive of other activities, solitary, and goal-oriented.
The exercise area must:
(i) be separate from the primary enclosure if the primary enclosure
does not provide sufficient space to achieve a running stride;
(ii) have flooring that is sufficient to allow for the type of
activity described above and is either solid flooring or, if nonsolid,
then it must be nonwire flooring that is safe for the breed, size, and
age of the dog, is free from protruding sharp edges; and is designed
so that the paw of the dog is unable to extend through or become
caught in the flooring;
(iii) be cleaned at least once each day;
(iv) be free of infestation by pests or vermin; and
(v) must designed in a manner to prevent escape of the dogs.
These exercise requirements would not be applicable to any particular
dog if a licensed veterinarian has determined that such exercise is
inappropriate due to the health, condition or wellbeing of the dog.
Unless the condition is permanent, it would have to be reviewed by the
veterinarian at least once every 30 days.
PIJAC Position.
PIJAC has for many years condemned substandard facilities and has
worked with USDA to ensure effective enforcement of the AWA. In fact,
PIJAC has supported legislation to strengthen the authority of USDA to
enforce the Act against unlicensed breeders who are required to be
licensed under the Act. However, the AWA was never intended to apply
to non-commercial breeders and PIJAC has not supported expansion of
the Act to apply to such breeders. Nor was the Act ever intended to
apply to traditional retail pet stores and PIJAC would oppose
expansion of the AWA to apply to such stores.
Recommended Action.
S. 3424 was assigned to the Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition
and Forestry. Click here to contact committee members. H.R. 5434
was assigned to the Committee on Agriculture in the House of
Representatives and a list of that committee membership may be
obtained by clicking here. Individuals may also easily contact their
Congressional representatives directly through PIJAC's Legislative
Action Center on the Government Affairs page of the PIJAC website
(http://www.pijac.org/governmentaffairs/
).
Neither of these bills has yet been set for hearing. PIJAC will be
posting revised PetAlerts on the Breaking News page of its website
(http://www.pijac.org/petinformation/breakingnews.asp...
) to advise members of any change in status and to recommend
appropriate action. You are encouraged to check the PIJAC website
regularly for additional information. Those having questions about
this legislation should contact PIJAC's Michael Maddox via email at
michael@xxxxxxxxx
by phone at 202-452-1525, ext. 105.
============================================================================
POST is Copyrighted 2010. 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@xxxxxxxxxxx
VISIT OUR WEBSITE - http://showgsd.org
NATIONAL BLOG - http://gsdnational.blogspot.com/
============================================================================
Other related posts:
- » [ SHOWGSD-L ] !!!!PUPS Bill Reintroduced In U.S. Congress !!!! VERY long, but PLEASE read. - Stormy Hope
