[ SHOWGSD-L ] more on the New Jersey Federation meeting with Jim Holt (long)
- From: Peggy <pmick@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: GSD Show List <showgsd-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2005 16:12:52 -0400
Note that the imports will not be controlled until after 25 have been
imported. So I presume they will simply become USDA licensed brokers,
like the Hunte Corporation that ships so many puppy mill dogs. A small
price for big business to pay.
No changes are really concrete yet. I am not sure the AKC won't become
partners with USDA, as they have with Cherrybrook, etc. for money.
Charlotte K.
PERMISSION TO CROSS POST GRANTED
Last evening Mr. Holt addressed the Federation in NJ. The format was
Mr. Holt spoke to the group and each person was entitled to one
question. The meeting was called to order at approximately 8:10.
The President told us we had the room until 9:30.
Mr. Holt introduced himself giving his background in dogs, which took
about 10 minutes. He then spoke on the 4 Provisions of PAWS.
The first being Source Records by Retail Stores whereby the retail
pet store would have to provide the source of the dogs or cats they
were selling. Currently, this information was not assessable.
The second was Temporary Suspension of Licensing. Currently the
suspension is just 21 days, which Mr. Holt explained is not enough
time for due process. PAWS would authorize the Dept. to suspend
licensing for up to 60 days. He also said that the intent wasn't to
suspend, but to give incentives for violators to correct the problem/
Third is Injunction Relief- where the USDA can seek an injunction to
comply or cease operations. Mr. Holt explained how difficult it is
to proceed under the existing law as other cases took precedent. He
stressed that the key to matter of injunction was only on 2
circumstances -1- if the animal was stolen and 2 if the violation
put animal's health was in eminent danger.
Fourth is "Bringing under regulation those operations that are truly
commercial and operating under the retail exclusion". "We want to
put an exemption for hobby-show breeders." When I heard this, I got
excited as I felt that somehow we were going to be put back in retail
and not be regulated. Sorry, I was wrong! Mr. Holt argues that
under the AWA, we were not exempted and that PAWS will exempt us! He
feels that at any time the AWA could change their policy on retail
and we would not be protected. With PAWS, we are protected and
exempted. The criteria used will be AKC's numbers from their High
Volume Breeder program.
At 8:50, Mr. Holt spoke of the impact PAWS will have on the
hobby/show breeder. He then defined each. "Hobby Breeders are
people who are not in the business of breeding dogs." "Show Breeders
breed for the advancement of quality of pure bred dogs."
He then mentioned that there was unanimous agreement that rescue and
shelters will be exempt.
Mr. Holt advised us that 5 Senators have signed onto the bill and he
anticipated several more signing on. He also told us that Senator
Santorum is going to hold a meeting, a mark-up before the fall,
before adjournment.
Some of the things to be covered in the mark-up include:
1-Redrafting the language to exclude mention of hunting dogs and
service dogs, which he added have been covered for 30 years under AWA.
2- Specific exemption for Rescue and Shelters.
3- Clear up language of numerical coverage- exemption is sell 25 or
fewer dogs and breed 6 or fewer litters for exemption.
At this point questions were taken from the floor.
The first was from Sue Sullivan, South Jersey KC. Her question was
about the hobby breeder exemptions based on numbers sold. It was
explained that unless you bred over 6 litters, the number of dogs
sold alone would not constitute a dealer.
Joan Murko, Garden State All Terrier Club asked about how the bill
will be enforced? How will the information be made available? Mr
Holt said that "...people will have to comply." He further said that
was how most laws were enforced , by compliance.
George (sorry, I didn't get the last name) from the Garden State
Weimaraner Club asked if there would be "an enabling clause to write
regulations after the act".
We then had a question from Catherine Spence from Burlington Co. KC
who didn't see the reason for PAWS if the Hunte Corp. could still
exist. Mr. Holt explained that Hunte was already USDA licensed and
regulated.
I then spoke and referred to an AKC flyer I had received at a
conference last April on "Opposing Hobby Breeder Licensing". I read
excerpts from the portion "Hobby Breeders are not commercial
breeders", such as: AWA's definition of a commercial breeder
as "persons who derive a substantial portion of their income from the
sale of dogs and cats for pets". Also that the Federal Government did
not intend to cover non-commercial or hobby breeders under AWA, that
hobby breeding is not a business, it is an avocation etc.
I said that the numbers weren't the issue for me personally as like
most people in the room, we would probably never breed any where near
that. I then said I was concerned about what would happen on the
state and local levels if PAWS is enacted. Once we are taken out of
retail, we do not have that vital argument that we were not meant to
be federally regulated. It makes fighting the battle much more
difficult. I mentioned the breeding bill that was just defeated in
Ma. whereby someone breeding just one litter would have been
considered commercial. I and also mentioned that AKC removed the
Federation links making it even more difficult to fight bad
legislation. I said I was concerned with "mini-paws" cropping up all
over the country.
I ended by saying we feel we have all been sold down the river.
Mr. Holt said that PAWS was more liberal in their numbers than the
states that already have breeding regulations in place. He also
mentioned on several occassions that USDA standards were less
stringent than AKC's.
Cathy Murch, Newton KC then asked about the numbers and
asked, "What's to say that the numbers won't change?" and Mr. Holt
replied, " Neither more or less likely."
Linda Deutch from Somerset Hills KC expressed her concerns about the
kennel licensing regulations in NJ and how many well established
kennels were just giving up as a result. She felt that the problem
was the badly worded AWA which was being used as a model for state
inspectors.
Elaine Werner, Schooley's Mt. KC said that the original purpose of
the AWA was to regulate laboratory animals and now we are talking
about regulating hobby breeders. She said that we could not accept
this bill until ALL NUMBERS were eliminated. To this she received a
round of applause.
Bud DiDonato, Trenton KC asked " How did the AKC get involved in
working with Santorum". Mr. Holt gave the same reply we have heard
many times, how they were invited into the process after the defeat
of the PPA, etc.
Lou Fallon from the KC of NNJ & Raritan River Akita Club asked about
what was in the mark-up. He was told it hadn't happened yet, but we
could expect a shelter & rescue exemption and clarification of the 25
dogs or 6 litters exemption.
NJ Federation President Priscilla Gabosch asked if we, the public,
could attend the Senate hearing. Mr. Holt explained to her that they
were closed hearings.
Peter Weber from Bay Shore Obedience Club asked if this would pre-
empt state & local laws.. It was explained that the states could not
have laws that were less restrictive than PAWS.
Karen Spey from Somerset Hills KC said that in NH there is a hobby
breeder bill pending that would give the humane society the duty of
inspecting the kennels. Karen wanted to know under PAWS, who would
be doing the inspections. Mr. Holt told her that USDA would be the
inspectors, not HSUS.
Karen Cartabona Staudt from Delaware Water Gap KC spoke and about the
import problem and how this bill was going to prevent the importation
of dogs. Mr. Holt explained that it wasn't. What was going to
happen is that after a person imports and sells over 25 dogs/cats
they would be regulated.
Elaine Werner ended the Q&A portion by saying that with all the
devastation from Katrina, how could the country afford to implement
this bill. In light of the Federal commitment to reconstruct the
Gulf states, that the AKC ask Santorum to pull the bill.
Mr. Holt's response to that was that there are still resources "for
the welfare of the dogs".
The meeting ended at 10 PM and several of us went to the podium to
speak personally with Jim. I did and asked him how long it would be
from the mark-up of the bill to the hearing of the full committee.
He told me that Santorum was going to first present the bill to the
sub-committee and as there was an over-lapping of members, it may not
be heard by the full committee before going to the Senate for a
vote. He also told me that Santorum might add the bill onto another
bill. I said, "Like the Farm Bill?" and Jim said "Yes, the Farm bill
was up for review in 2007 and it could be added onto that". I
thought the bill had to be heard this year and Jim said no, it had
till 2007. I then inquired about what happened if Santorum were not
re-elected. He told me "the bill would be decided way before that".
All I can say is that Jim is NOT backing down from pushing this
bill. He also mentioned at some point that he was in Senator Roberts
(KS) office last week, who others said is opposed to the bill. He
is still working hard to lobby for this bill and is extremely
confident that it will be passed.
All I can say is that if we are going to kill this bill, we are going
to have to do it in committee. I think we need to keep up the
pressure of contacting the Senate Ag Committee.
Before I attended the meeting I had no idea what the feeling of my
fellow New Jerseyites was going to be. Some of our All Breed and
Specialty Clubs have come out in opposition to the bill, but many
have been silent to date. I was pleasantly surprised that at this
meeting the overwhelming sentiment of the attendee's was against
PAWS. Every person who asked a question was clearly opposed to the
bill, with perhaps the exception of the NJFDC President whom I could
not read.
Although I have not heard Mr. Holt speak to a group in the past, I
do know Jim as we are both in English Cockers. I felt he was not
very comfortable addressing this group. Someone who had heard him
speak just last week also felt that he was certainly not as at ease
as he had been the week before. I got this feeling even before the
Q&A portion began.
Marjorie
============================================================================
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 ] more on the New Jersey Federation meeting with Jim Holt (long)
