Shop LocalFriday, April 22, 2011
If the energy, letters and money spent on Proposition B is any indication, animal welfare issues obviously spark passion and emotion.
Proposition B was approved in November by 52 percent of Missouri voters. The proposition was billed as the “Puppy Mill Cruelty Prevention Act.” It placed specific restrictions on dog breeders designed to prohibit inhumane treatment and conditions.
Passage of the ballot issue, however, did not quiet opponents of the law.
They brought their dissension to the Legislature, where sympathetic lawmakers have crafted legislation to ease a number of the restrictions.
Gov. Jay Nixon and his state Department of Agriculture officials also have been working with a number of advocacy groups representing both factions to hammer out a compromise.
Not every group has joined that effort; some animal welfare organizations contend the will of the voters must be respected and Proposition B deserves to be implemented without revision or repeal.
We have attempted to balance principle and practicality as we watch the process unfold.
We opposed Proposition B prior to the November vote because we believed it would miss its intended target, inhumane animal breeders, and punish humane operators.
Following statewide approval, we encouraged lawmakers to uphold the vote. The law has not yet become effective; we believe implementation would help indicate what changes, if any, are desirable or necessary.
In the governing process, however, opposing principles often must yield to compromise.
The ability to forge a compromise is a quality of leadership.
We believe it is entirely appropriate for our chief executive, Gov. Jay Nixon, to invite opposing factions to the negotiating table in an effort to reach an agreement.
Proposition B has been a source of much polarization in Missouri.
We don’t expect that polarization to be eliminated entirely. What we encourage is a reasonable compromise that protects humane breeders while discouraging inhumane puppy mills.
Comments
ptbamdb 2 years, 1 month ago
"What we encourage is a reasonable compromise that protects humane breeders while discouraging inhumane puppy mills." That says it all. Governor Nixon's MISSOURI Solution is definitely what is needed to resolve the entire situation.
If anyone is against this compromise, you can bet that they have another agenda and their true intent is to destroy the entire dog breeding industry in Missouri, as evidenced by Prop B.
.
idontbelieveit 2 years, 1 month ago
I don't understand why you think anyone wants the dog breeders to go out of business? That doesn't make sense. The point is to get the overbreeding of dogs, mixed and purebred under some kind of reasonable control. A lot of people can be against this compromise because of how it came about and not because they want to stop the breeding of dogs alltogether. These issues were discussed before people even voted on proposition B and yet they still voted for proposition B. There is no cap on the number of dogs in a breeding facility in this compromise. Does that make sense if you have millions of homeless dogs, mixed breed and purebred? It does not to me.
ptbamdb 2 years, 1 month ago
Not much about Prop B makes sense. By changing the rules drastically, Prop B is forcing dog breeders into bankruptcy. Many breeders have industry-approved, expensive buildings (that many are still making payments on) that would instantly become obsolete and unusable the minute Prop B is in effect. That $30,000 building, not even paid for, will become totally worthless, as no one can house their dogs in that building legally anymore. Breeders have to build new buildings to specifications in Prop B. Another $40,000 or more. Will ANY bank finance a building when the breeder is still paying on the other building that is now worthless? Of course, they now have less disposable income (thanks to Prop B) to pay on the now worthless building and the new one they can't finance. Does Prop B make sense when it will cause MORE homelessness in dogs (and people)? You worry about the homeless dogs.......how about instantly having another 100,000 to worry about when Prop B hits?
idontbelieveit 2 years, 1 month ago
I don't understand how if the buildings were okay and humane in the first place why would anyone go bankrupt to meet the proposition B standards? Why are there such large-scale breeding operations of dogs? There are purebred rescues in each state and all over the country that rescue purebreds from shelters and dog owners, etc. Like I said, there are millions of unwanted purebreds and mixed breed dogs that, first of all, are euthanized every year because they can't find a home, not to mention all the ones that are in foster homes and long-term facilities or no-kill shelters/sanctuaries? We all play a part in this problem, from breeding of dogs to the person that buys the dog. We all have a responsibility to help these dogs. It is not up to all the animal welfare organizations solely to solve the problem of unwanted dogs.
ptbamdb 2 years, 1 month ago
The buildings were designed specifically for small dogs, for their comfort, sanitation, and ease of care. They are elevated runs with perforated flooring that allows dogs' waste to drop into a fiberglass washdown system below to be flushed away. This keeps the dogs clean, as they never track through their waste. They have water always available delivered through an automatic system. They have an outside attached run for exercise. Some are single-level (like mine); some have two levels.
These buildings will be illegal. All dogs will have to be housed in a building at ground level with an attached run (damp concrete? gravel? dirt?). The obsolete kennel cannot be retrofitted to comply with Prop B. I understand there are homeless dogs. But do you know that some shelters and rescues import dogs from other countries because they don't have enough? Rescues regularly buy dogs and puppies from auctions to sell. I see this from a different point of view. Rescues call breeders offering to take or buy any 'unwanted' dogs or puppies. You would think that there are enough homeless, stray, displaced, and unwanted dogs that the rescues and shelters wouldn't have to solicit or import.
We raise purpose-bred puppies and have a steady market. Those customers want puppies, not adult dogs. We are not taking rescue or shelters' market-share.
idontbelieveit 2 years, 1 month ago
You made some valid points. I would have to go in person to see your specific kennel to get a clearer picture. I understand also that you are coming from a different viewpoint. But hopefully you can understand the other viewpoint from the side of rescue. I have not heard of any rescues importing dogs to sell for adoption but I understand you have. I can understand rescues wanting to help buy any unwanted dogs or puppies at an auction so that they don't end up in the wrong hands or sent to a shelter. People do that with horses also so that they don't end up in the wrong hands. Adult dogs, compared to puppies, are harder to find homes for. Enforcement is of the utmost importance but also there still has to be some kind of standard for breeding facilities in run size, cage size, etc. and it will never please everyone and it is always true that the bad guys will always mess it up for people who are trying to do the right thing. Thank you for at least clarifying your particular situation.
Sign in to comment
Or login with:
OpenID