RSS

“NO!” On Missouri Propostion B

15 Sep

============================================================

UPDATE:

I want you, the reader, to understand that I am absolutely against Puppy Mills and Cruelty To Animals.  I am here fighting against bad legislation (Proposition B) which will not stop Puppy Mills and Animal Cruelty in Missouri.  If this bill was about funding the current good law in Missouri and tweaking anything with issues, I’d be all for it.  After the election, I will contact my Missouri State Senator and Representative as well as others with whom I’m acquainted to ask that more funding be given to the prevention of Animal Cruelty.

============================================================

I strongly urge you to vote “NO” on Missouri Proposition B.

Proposition B can be viewed here.

While the text and title of the Proposition sound good to the average reader, further investigation proves that the Amendment is truly nefarious and is being advanced by a radical group bent on ending Pet Ownership and Hunting.  AND, NOTHING in the Amendment will truly do anything to address the puppy mill problem in Missouri.

The Amendment will require changes to the housing requirements for licensed and lawful pet breeders that will immediately criminalize existing legal behavior.  Again, the currently law abiding pet breeders will be made into criminals.

From 24thstate.com…

86,000 dogs will have to be put down, many of them healthy, happy and loved.

The HSUS says there are over 200,000 dogs in Missouri that are kept by breeders.  There are some 1200 licensed breeders.  If you limit the number of dogs you can keep to 50, you have 60,000 dogs.  What is going to happen to the other 140,000 dogs?  There are some 350 shelters in Missouri.  To accomodate the overflow, 400 dogs per shelter would have to be offloaded before the year is out.  The vast majority of those dogs are currently healthy and cared for by dog-lovers. What will happen to them?

Some will be put up for adoption.  Those who are not rescued, will be killed, released into the wild, or moved into illegal puppy mills hidden away from the state.

The problem with broad regulation is it affects everyone. It’s not hard to say that 86,000 dogs will be killed if this measure passes. 64% of dogs that go into a shelter don’t come out.   But the HSUS and Prop B say nothing about this problem.

More here.

Existing Laws, Rules, Regulations:

Missouri Revised Statutes – Dogs And Cats

Rules of Department of Agriculture – Division 30 Animal Health / Chapter 9 – Animal Care Facilities

Animal Care Facilities Act Program (ACFA)

Please read up on Wayne Pacelle here and here who is the CEO & President of HSUS.org and is advancing this Amendment in Missouri.  HSUS.org held a rally yesterday evening in St. Louis to kick-off the effort for Proposition B

Additionally, the Amendment does nothing to set out the requirements, guidelines and funding of the enforcement.

Here is some more good information from The Alliance For Truth

  • Proposition B specifically targets those who are already licensed and inspected by the Missouri Department of Agriculture and who are in compliance with state and federal laws. It does nothing to address those who collect animals living in horrible conditions as long as the animals are not being bred to produce puppies for sale as pets.  Proposition B is specifically aimed at eliminating the legal, licensed professional dog breeders in Missouri who produce healthy, happy puppies.
  • Prop B creates a class C misdemeanor crime of “cruelty” for ANY violation during an inspection of a kennel by the Missouri Department of Agriculture, including a drop of food in a water bowl, a cobweb in the corner of a building, a scratch on a painted surface, etc.
  • Stacked cage enclosures with trays below each for easy cleaning and sanitation would be a class C misdemeanor for a licensed breeder while veterinarians, shelters, humane societies and rescues could use the same enclosures and be totally exempt from the law. Show breeders with more than ten intact female dogs could not crate their dogs for any purpose while preparing for shows, grooming or keeping intact females separate from males.
  • Legal, licensed breeders could have NO MORE than 50 dogs, regardless of the excellent care they receive while anyone not breeding dogs could have unlimited numbers of dogs living in filthy conditions.  Prop B creates the first step in HSUS and other animal rights groups dictating the number of animals one may own.
  • Prompt treatment for ANY illness or injury would be required by a licensed veterinarian, including something as simple as an upset stomach, torn toenail, cut on the nose, or any minor issue often treated by the breeder. Costs for veterinary care for minor issues would skyrocket, resulting in fewer purebred dogs available for public demand.
  • Prop B requires constant and unfettered access to an outside exercise area which will be deadly to newborn and non-weaned puppies that may crawl outside to follow their mothers and cannot find their way back inside. Babies will die of heat exhaustion and dehydration in the summer and hypothermia in the winter. Drafts of air created by required indoor/outdoor runs for mothers will ensure upper respiratory stress and pneumonia for babies, resulting in the deaths of many newborn puppies.
  • Breeders of hunting dogs are exempt from licensing unless even one of their dogs or puppies is sold as a pet or lives inside the home of the purchaser.
  • There is no scientific basis for eliminating tenderfoot flooringwhich allows for easy cleaning and sterilizing of enclosures.
  • Proposition B interferes with the working relationship between a breeder and his or her veterinarian on the health of their dogs and the frequency of breeding. The Department of Agriculture would be charged with determining the breeding frequency of dogs in licensed facilities.
  • HSUS has introduced Prop B as a means of eliminating the legal, licensed professional dog breeders in Missouri. According to the Department of Agriculture, no current licensed breeder can comply with the regulations put forth in Prop B, no matter how clean and well run the facility. Cost prohibitive space requirements coupled with misdemeanor crimes for the most minor of issues will eliminate the legalindustry in our state.
  • Only unlicensed, substandard breeders will be left to produce puppies while continuing to hide from state laws.
  • If Prop. B passes, it will further harm the economy in Missouri.
Advertisements
 
11 Comments

Posted by on September 15, 2010 in Miscellaneous

 

Tags: , ,

11 responses to ““NO!” On Missouri Propostion B

  1. Da Sysgod

    September 30, 2010 at 12:17 pm

    GET INFORMED! DEFEND AGRICULTURE!
    Don’t listen to HSUS, it’s all HSBS!
    http://www.votenoonpropb.com

     
  2. Autonomy4All

    October 5, 2010 at 3:12 am

    I fail to see how unfettered access to the outdoors protects dogs and puppies from extreme heat and cold.

    Many of the dogs in shelters are there because they were poorly bred and have weak nerves as a result. The owners couldn’t handle their nervous hyper temperaments. I worked as a veterinary technician and saw first hand the physical and temperament problems associated with indiscriminate breeding. If we are going to have pets let’s do our best to ensure they come from professional breeders who devote their time and attention to raising well balanced dogs.

    If Proposition B’s only aim is to ensure adequate care then WHY are shelters, rescues, veterinary clinics, HSUS, and non breeding owners exempt? Don’t they all deserve the same treatment? If you answer yes to that question you’ve hopefully just realized the truth behind this oppressive illogical Proposition B.

     
    • Anarchy4All

      October 21, 2010 at 8:47 am

      Letting dogs to walk / stretch out lets them build musle. They will taste TERRIBLE!

       
  3. Jon

    October 27, 2010 at 2:05 pm

    Does anyone have a reference for this:

    According to the Missouri Department of Agriculture, no current licensed breeder can comply with the regulations put forth in Proposition B, no matter how clean and well run the facility.

    I would like to have some proof about this statement.

     
    • bbollmann

      October 28, 2010 at 9:47 am

      I’ve contacted the folks at TheAllianceForTruth.com requesting confirmation. I’ve also searched the webbernets for confirmation as well. I haven’t received or found confirmation (I would like to have some proof too as I didn’t think about the ‘confirmation’ as well as I should).

      However, the statement describes the fact that if there is failure to comply, the breeder is to be charged with a Class C Misdemeanor. And a simple leaf in the water is grounds for failure to comply. It may sound dramatic, but you don’t want laws on the books that say such things.

      You wouldn’t want a law that says you have to go 55 miles per hours; you want a law that says 55 miles per hour is the maximum/limit.

       
  4. Sally Vaughn

    October 28, 2010 at 9:14 am

    YOU ARE A LIAR!!!!! Shame on you!!!!! Remember God is watching all of us and you can’t lie to him. I find it amazing how many of you conservatives change your points of view when you are about to face your maker! It is disgusting ! Lee Atwater is a perfect example!!!! Go ahead spread your lies about Prop B but, remember one day just like Lee Atwater you will face your maker and you can’t lie, sidestep, or snooker GOD! You people say you’re conservative , but the truth is the only thing you people conserve is compassion, sympathy, empathy, and of course your money that you would never have made if it had not been for the BLOOD, SWEAT, AND TEARS OF THE WORKING MAN working for insulting wages! Hold your head up high here ,because I predict this won’t be the situation when you are explaining to god that you didn’t know how incredibly cruel this has been for the animals! SHAME ON YOU!!!!! People like you should be placed in tiny cages like the animals have and are forced to endure! What a bunch of incredibly sick people you are!!!!!!!! SIncerely, Sally Vaughn

     
  5. Karen

    October 30, 2010 at 12:16 pm

    Well, interesting stuff. I have to say, I’m from TX, so even though this prop doesn’t directly effect me, I was asked to look into it by a good friend I have in Missouri. This group HSUS seems really fishy. there is no doubt that puppy mills can be terrible. But professionally breeders generally care for their dogs and do it not only for the money, but because they love the dogs.

     
  6. Tom Langlitz

    October 31, 2010 at 11:25 pm

    My wife and I bred and showed German Shepherd dogs for most of our 33 years together. Although we are less involved in breeding and showing now, I administer an email list of GSD exhibitors and breeders, so I have remained in touch with my peers. Suffice it to say that I know many GSD dog breeders across the country, and quite a few people who are active in other breeds. I am in Illinois, but across the river from St. Louis MO, so I have seen all of the campaigning. The proponents of this deceptive proposition have been using a few dog breeders in their ads, implying that dog breeders are for the proposition. That is just more deception. I do not know a single Missouri dog breeder who is for Prop B, but I know several who are speaking out against it every chance they get. In fact, most serious dog breeders consider the HSUS as much an enemy as PETA. If you want to know the truth about the HSUS and PETA, go to this site. http://www.gsdbydesign.com/PETA.htm

     
  7. michelle hunter

    November 1, 2010 at 4:05 pm

    Well, I was going to suggest to Sally to cool her jets. I am totally against animal cruelty, and it sickens me to see the commercials of those dogs who have suffered horribly. And it would be easy to vote based on your emotional reaction to that ad, which is what they want you to do and not research the real truth behind this.
    If I voted strictly on my emotions and compassion for animals I would support the passage of this bill, but when I take a closer look at it I realize that it is not all that it appears to be. This bill does nothing to
    stop animal hoarders, or animal abusers on those who run unlicensed kennels. The horrific pictures we are seeing on the ad are from unlicensed kennels. Licensed kennels are already in compliance with the law and are rigoursly inspected all the time. What we really need is more funding for the enforcement and prosecution of who the real offenders are, and that would be those who do not have a license to breed dogs and therefore can get away with anything, they have no inspections of there facilities. Most of these places are tipped off by people who are suspicious that something horrible is happening. They are usually in such a remore area it would be hard to know what these people were doing. Obviously they don’t sell these dogs anywhere near the puppy mills.
    What is needed is funding for hiring more inspectors. Prop B does not do anything to take care of that issue, and it is just more money in the pocket of HSUS. If HSUS cares so deeply about these animals then why is it out of the $86 million dollars of income they received, only $450,000 went to the actual care of dogs and cats? So for every commercial that they advertise for the horrible abuse of these dogs in puppy mills, of the $19 requested for every ad, only one dime goes to the actual care of the animals.
    So I think all these facts should be considered before voting only by your emotions.

     

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: