[ SHOWGSD-L ] Re: showgsd-l Digest V4 #1028
- From: Santanagsd1954@xxxxxx
- To: showgsd-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, Showgsd-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2007 13:53:51 EST
In a message dated 2/26/2007 9:33:28 AM Pacific Standard Time, Showgsd-
Msg: #8 in digest
Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2007 12:28:20 -0500
From: Peggy <pmick12@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Montana Bill 726
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, orwhat constitutes
severely overcrowded conditions, 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. How about owning 10 German Shepherds,
and having a small kennel building with only three runs...with three of
the 10 dogs living in the house...and the dogs in the kennel taking
turns using the runs, or being doubled up...I think that owner would
also be a person of interest.
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
>
ONE THING THAT KEEPS COMING BACK TO BOTHER ME, IS THE FACT THAT IT COSTS A
LOT OF MONEY IN FOOD AND VET CARE AND FACILITIES AND THEIR UP-KEEP TO HAVE
EVEN 10 OF MOST ANYTHING, EXCEPT PERHAPS MICE OR RATS, OR GUINEA PIGS, ETC..
BUT TO KEEP MORE THAN 10 DOGS REQUIRES SOMEONE IN EXCELLENT HEALTH , MENTAL
AND PHYSICAL, OF SOME GOOD AND DEPENDABLE FINANCIAL MEANS TO AFFORD ALL THE
CARE NECESSARY TO PROVIDE A 'GOOD' LIFE FOR SUCH AN ENTOURAGE.. IF ONE IS
ALONE, AND THE RESPONSIBLITY OF ALL THESE CREATURES LIES WITH THAT ONE PERSON,
THEN THEY MUST NEVER GET SICK OR INJURED, BECAUSE THAT PRECLUDES THE OWNERS
ABILITY TO CARE FOR THEM..
IF I WERE NOT CONCERNED ABOUT THE FUTURE AND WELFARE OF THE FOUR
SHEPHERDS I OWN... I WOULD HAVE SEVERAL MORE , IF I WERE MERELY SELF-INDULGENT,
WITH
NO REAL SENSE OF THE RESPONSIBILITY I WAS TAKING ON, PARTICULARLY AT MY AGE. IT
IS SIMPLY A MATTER OF COMMON SENSE.. I WOULD LOVE TO LOOK OUT MY WINDOW AND
SEE SEVERAL ADORABLE MINIATURE HORSES, WHICH I FIND VERY HARD TO RESIST..
BUT I ALSO HAVE ENOUGH COMMON SENSE TO KNOW WHAT IT COSTS TO FEED AND HOUSE
THEM AS WELL AS VET BILLS FOR NORMAL CARE AND EMERGENCIES, ETC. ETC.
SOME PEOPLE ARE UNABLE TO MAKE THAT DISTINCTION OR UNDERSTAND THE
RAMIFICATIONS OF THEIR DESIRES TO ACCUMULATE THESE ANIMALS..AND THESE PEOPLE
MUST BE
CONTROLLED, BY LAWS, FOR THE WELFARE OF THE ANIMALS THEMSELVES, WHO HAVEN'T
ANY VOICE OR CHOICE, IN THE MATTER...JMO BARB WILLIAMS
============================================================================
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
============================================================================
Other related posts:
- » [ SHOWGSD-L ] Re: showgsd-l Digest V4 #1028
