alzahra: I Like Chocolate Milk!: There is not an actual definition of puppy mill anywhere.

Actually it very clearly states that by 'large scale breeding operation' they mean any breeding operation with 50 or more breeding dogs. That's explicit.
Link (new window)

It's also the language that was on the ballot.

Again, who determined that having more than 50 breeding dogs makes a breeder a puppy mill? Is it a legal definition or an opinion?

stainedglassdoll:

The part that says the females are purposely being used to produce offspring to be sold? It may be an arbitrary number but it's clearly stated.


Wait, so now the definition of puppy mill is anyone who owns 10 or more breeding biatches and/or has possession of more than 50 breeding animals and who sells those offspring for use as a pet? Where does the part about cruelty and inhumane treatment come in?

base935: Another vote for a Dogurday.

I'm sorry to interrupt, but is that dog trained to point out rocks for you? Because I know another black and white mutt of similar size and shape who does the exact same thing.

"Takin' a walk, takin' a walk, STOP! A ROCK! RIGHT THERE! Oh, you don't want that one? Okay. Takin' a walk, takin' a walk... GOOD GOD! ANOTHER ROCK!"

He won't do it for anything except rocks; not for leaves, not for bugs, not for discarded chewing gum. And there can be thousand of rocks to either side, but if one is conspicuously present in the middle of the sidewalk, bam. Stop and point. Even points the same way as your dog in the picture, with the tip of his paw, instead of with his wrist like a "normal" pointer breed.

/unnecessary story, brah.
//just glad to know somebody else in the world gets to enjoy a crazy rock-pointing dog. :D

stainedglassdoll: I Like Chocolate Milk!: stainedglassdoll:

The part that says the females are purposely being used to produce offspring to be sold? It may be an arbitrary number but it's clearly stated.


Wait, so now the definition of puppy mill is anyone who owns 10 or more breeding biatches and/or has possession of more than 50 breeding animals and who sells those offspring for use as a pet? Where does the part about cruelty and inhumane treatment come in?

For the purposes of this bill, a "puppy mill" is a large scale dog breeding operation (which numbers clearly stated, as previously mentioned). The working definition of "puppy mill", again, for the purposes of this bill, has nothing to do with the treatment of the dogs.

Was it disingenuous to define the term "puppy mill" in such a way, when in common vernacular it is usually associated with the negative connotations of inhumane treatment of dogs? Yes. Was the titling and wording of the measure designed to invoke these negative connotation so people would vote from their hearts and not their heads? Yes. However, the original argument was whether or not "puppy mill" was defined in the text, which it was as it applies to the purposes of the measure.

The moral here for everyone is to be sure you read in full the text of what you are voting on, and not choose based on the title or what your previous assumptions are. It may very well be that the content is consistent with your prior interpretation, but if not, you don't want to vote against your own ideals.

I already have you favorited, but damn girl, you ARE my favorite.

I Like Chocolate Milk: You are as dumb as a bag of hammers. If you have 10 or more dogs, and you are breeding ALL of them and SELLING all of the pups, you're a puppy-mill, plain and simple.

I'll bet it's hard for you to decide which side to put the peanut butter on a pb & j sammie, isn't it?

akula: There's concerns that this law could end up causing problems in the agricultural sector with non-canines as well.

Okay, I've heard this a few times (that Prop B is trying to stifle the agri-business.) BUT Prop B specifically stated dogs in the title and the measures. Something entirely different would have to be passed for livestock. It really just seems like scaremongering.

That being said, I didn't hear about any of the arguments by the AKC. I feel a little chagrined for gut voting "puppy mills bad!!", but not really. I wouldn't change my vote because if the problem really is in the enforcement and not the laws then nothing will change because of this and Prop B is just more useless mandates. Otherwise, it will make it easier to prosecute puppy mill runners.

DFWPhotoGuy:
Ok, enough of that...my Trix!

*gasp* AWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW

apeiron242: House of Tards: How the hell does an anti-puppy mill initiative nearly fail?

...Christians, who are raised to think of animals as objects (tools to be used, food to be eaten).

I want some of whatever you're smoking

stainedglassdoll: For the purposes of this bill, a "puppy mill" is a large scale dog breeding operation (which numbers clearly stated, as previously mentioned). The working definition of "puppy mill", again, for the purposes of this bill, has nothing to do with the treatment of the dogs.

Was it disingenuous to define the term "puppy mill" in such a way, when in common vernacular it is usually associated with the negative connotations of inhumane treatment of dogs? Yes. Was the titling and wording of the measure designed to invoke these negative connotation so people would vote from their hearts and not their heads? Yes. However, the original argument was whether or not "puppy mill" was defined in the text, which it was as it applies to the purposes of the measure.

The moral here for everyone is to be sure you read in full the text of what you are voting on, and not choose based on the title or what your previous assumptions are. It may very well be that the content is consistent with your prior interpretation, but if not, you don't want to vote against your own ideals.

While I still don't agree with you about whether or not the definition of puppy mill was actually there, I do agree that this bill was intentionally written to invoke an emotional response from the voters.

For the record, I'm not a commercial breeder. I have 4 dogs (3 purebreds and one rescue) and one cat I rescued from a pet store that was allowing her to starve to death in the front window. I'm not pro-puppy mill in any way, shape, or form. I do think that some of this Prop was worthy of consideration - the size and flooring of the enclosures for one thing. I just don't believe that the government should have the right to determine how many dogs a person can own. People should be allowed to have as many dogs as they can humanely and correctly care for. I also don't think that more legislation is the answer when something isn't working the way people think it should. Enforce the laws that are already there, don't just make up new ones.

Bohemian: My dog approves.
49% of Missouri voters hate puppies.
The HSUS is a bunch of nutjobs worse than PETA.
The tougher restrictions are still a good idea.
Puppy mill owners should be forced to live in a 3x3 cage with a grate floor.
Legit dog breeders who are actual breeders and not dog farmers won't be hurt by this.
/Woof!

Seriously I think a handful of people had legitimate reasons to be against this (akula actually read the bill before deciding to vote against it) but there were so many rediculous reasons people voted against it.

"The government shouldn't tell me how many dogs I can own." -sorry bud but your rights end where the rights of others being and animals have some rights
"Current laws are enough." -Current laws are that dogs have to be fed and watered twice a day and kept in a cage that they can stand up and turn around in. This is fine for a normal dog owner but I don't see how it does anything to slow or stop puppy mills.
"Shelters will have to shut down- they can't meet these regulations!!" -the law clearly says the rules only apply to breeding operations and specifically not shelters. or chickens. jesus.

Yeah I'm fine with people being against this but most of the people I talked to who were against it had no idea what it actually said.

zabadu: I Like Chocolate Milk: You are as dumb as a bag of hammers. If you have 10 or more dogs, and you are breeding ALL of them and SELLING all of the pups, you're a puppy-mill, plain and simple.

Zabadu, get bent. I have been able to discuss this without any type of personal attack on anybody. It's too bad you couldn't do the same.

spidermilk: "Current laws are enough." -Current laws are that dogs have to be fed and watered twice a day...

Just a little sidenote: Prop B calls for dogs to be fed "at least once a day sufficient to maintain good health" so it actually requires less than what the current law requires, which is 2 meals per day.

So is there an actual ban on how many dogs you can humanely care for or is the ban on how many INTACT dogs you can humanely care for?

sweetcakes: DFWPhotoGuy:
Ok, enough of that...my Trix!

*gasp* AWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW

Looks at profile - happy red aussie mix --- FAVD!

I Like Chocolate Milk!: zabadu: I Like Chocolate Milk: You are as dumb as a bag of hammers. If you have 10 or more dogs, and you are breeding ALL of them and SELLING all of the pups, you're a puppy-mill, plain and simple.

Zabadu, get bent. I have been able to discuss this without any type of personal attack on anybody. It's too bad you couldn't do the same.

Sorry if it hit too close to home. People are regulated on how many pets they can have because some people can't seem to figure out how many they CAN have and humanely keep. Obviously, you don't get that, and want the rules not to apply to you.

I Like Chocolate Milk!: spidermilk: "Current laws are enough." -Current laws are that dogs have to be fed and watered twice a day...

Just a little sidenote: Prop B calls for dogs to be fed "at least once a day sufficient to maintain good health" so it actually requires less than what the current law requires, which is 2 meals per day.

Actually - no.

New law: (2) "Sufficient food and clean water" means access to appropriate nutritious food at least once a day sufficient to maintain good health; and continuous access to potable water that is not frozen, and is free of debris, feces, algae, and other contaminants.

Old law:
"Adequate food", the provision, at suitable intervals of not more than twelve hours, unless the dietary requirements of the species require a longer interval, of a quantity of wholesome foodstuff, suitable for the species and age, sufficient to maintain a reasonable level of nutrition in each animal, all of which foodstuff is served in a safe receptacle, dish, or container;

For all the people out there yelling to get them from rescues, I got news for you. Rescues treat people like they are rapist sh*t assholes. I grew up with dogs all my life, Love basset hounds, wanted to get a purebred one. Called up and talked to to like 4 different rescues around the DC area.

I was flat told by 2 places they refused to sell to military members.

The others wanted me to come in and interview with them before I could even see their dogs, fill out paperwork(one wanted a criminal background check) Then of course home reviews, in location play time with different animals for compatibility issues, One told me I had to get rid of my cat to get one of their dogs. I was told they would be doing home reviews for weeks/months after I got a dog. This was of course over the rude and condensing treatment I got from the women that I talked to.
I understand they needed to make sure the people are not going to beat the animals or just abandon them but in the end of the day they lost me getting from them by how I was treated. I ended up finding one off of the internet. I have had him for 5 years and he is 14 years old. When he dies I will be on the look out again and I swore I would never be treated like crap for wanting a pet. I will go anywhere but a rescue for my next dog.

ace in your face: So is there an actual ban on how many dogs you can humanely care for or is the ban on how many INTACT dogs you can humanely care for?

Every county has a law on how many dogs you can have, intact or not.

5 dollar milkshake: Could you please expand on that? I donate to the ASPCA every month, but was thinking about donating to the HSUS just because it seems like the ASPCA is mostly a New York thing rather than a national thing. Just curious if you had a link on info about the HSUS not being so great. Thank you.

If you really want your money to do some good, donate to a local rescue group. They'll use the money for things like food and medicine. You can save a life for ~$100.

Phins: 5 dollar milkshake: Could you please expand on that? I donate to the ASPCA every month, but was thinking about donating to the HSUS just because it seems like the ASPCA is mostly a New York thing rather than a national thing. Just curious if you had a link on info about the HSUS not being so great. Thank you.

If you really want your money to do some good, donate to a local rescue group. They'll use the money for things like food and medicine. You can save a life for ~$100.

Or Best Friends Animal Society.

zabadu: at suitable intervals of not more than twelve hours,

Actually yes - "suitable intervals of not more than 12 hours" - since there are 24 hours in a day, that's 2x per day.

Dropzonetoe: For all the people out there yelling to get them from rescues, I got news for you. Rescues treat people like they are rapist sh*t assholes. I grew up with dogs all my life, Love basset hounds, wanted to get a purebred one. Called up and talked to to like 4 different rescues around the DC area.

I was flat told by 2 places they refused to sell to military members.

The others wanted me to come in and interview with them before I could even see their dogs, fill out paperwork(one wanted a criminal background check) Then of course home reviews, in location play time with different animals for compatibility issues, One told me I had to get rid of my cat to get one of their dogs. I was told they would be doing home reviews for weeks/months after I got a dog. This was of course over the rude and condensing treatment I got from the women that I talked to.
I understand they needed to make sure the people are not going to beat the animals or just abandon them but in the end of the day they lost me getting from them by how I was treated. I ended up finding one off of the internet. I have had him for 5 years and he is 14 years old. When he dies I will be on the look out again and I swore I would never be treated like crap for wanting a pet. I will go anywhere but a rescue for my next dog.

I do think that some rescues need to try a little harder to strike a balance between finding responsible owners and eliminating all possible adopters. I have also heard that some who don't adopt to military members will if you can provide some kind of proof that you won't be deployed or required to move. Also did you only try breed specific rescues because I think they are much pickier than typical animal shelters. All our local animal shelter wants is 1. Landlord phone # if you have one 2. Vet phone # if you have other pets 3. The money

I think they get so many owner surrenders or dogs being adopted and coming back that they don't really trust people at all. We are thinking about adopting a second cat and I'm so paranoid they'll find out our first cat is declawed (not my choice- this cat was declawed when we inherited him!) or decide that German Shepherds have too high of prey drives for us to have a cat. (Our dog does have a medium drive but does a perfect leave it on cats & other objects)

So it does suck. You could get a pup from a responsible breeder who breeds (and shows their dogs for fun and to prove they are good examples of the breed, does thorough health checks before breeding, extensively socializes their dogs/puppies, etc.) to improve the breed of dog. These puppies are not cheap though...

I Like Chocolate Milk!: zabadu: at suitable intervals of not more than twelve hours,

Actually yes - "suitable intervals of not more than 12 hours" - since there are 24 hours in a day, that's 2x per day.

appropriate nutritious food at least once a day sufficient to maintain good health

Interpret that any way you want. Sufficient food to MAINTAIN GOOD HEALTH. Once a day, twice a day - whatever is sufficient to maintain good health, but no less than once per day.

People have almost always fed their dog once a day. It's only recently that vets have said twice is better.

The law is also more clear now on water - the access must be AT ALL TIMES, not frozen and free of debris.

Old law: (3) "Adequate water", the provision, either continuously or at intervals suitable to the species, which intervals shall not exceed eight hours, of a supply of potable water in a safe receptacle, dish, or container;

New law:
and continuous access to potable water that is not frozen, and is free of debris, feces, algae, and other contaminants.

You want to nit pick whatever you feel is wrong out of the bill. You do that. You sound more and more like a breeder every time you post.

zabadu: Every county has a law on how many dogs you can have, intact or not.

Here it's four dogs unless you have some sort of license to breed dogs. And the dogs should be licensed and they'd really prefer they have rabies vaccinations.

At first, my dog was like...



But then she realized she'd already been adopted and is living a life of absolute luxury and so she...



Then went back to her default setting...



/Rescue a Greyhound
//Best dog ever!

Dropzonetoe: For all the people out there yelling to get them from rescues, I got news for you. Rescues treat people like they are rapist sh*t assholes. I grew up with dogs all my life, Love basset hounds, wanted to get a purebred one. Called up and talked to to like 4 different rescues around the DC area.

I was flat told by 2 places they refused to sell to military members.

The others wanted me to come in and interview with them before I could even see their dogs, fill out paperwork(one wanted a criminal background check) Then of course home reviews, in location play time with different animals for compatibility issues, One told me I had to get rid of my cat to get one of their dogs. I was told they would be doing home reviews for weeks/months after I got a dog. This was of course over the rude and condensing treatment I got from the women that I talked to.
I understand they needed to make sure the people are not going to beat the animals or just abandon them but in the end of the day they lost me getting from them by how I was treated. I ended up finding one off of the internet. I have had him for 5 years and he is 14 years old. When he dies I will be on the look out again and I swore I would never be treated like crap for wanting a pet. I will go anywhere but a rescue for my next dog.

spidermilk: I do think that some rescues need to try a little harder to strike a balance between finding responsible owners and eliminating all possible adopters. I have also heard that some who don't adopt to military members will if you can provide some kind of proof that you won't be deployed or required to move. Also did you only try breed specific rescues because I think they are much pickier than typical animal shelters.

I volunteer for a rescue group and in these threads, there's always someone talking about onerous requirements. Some rescue groups do go overboard. I've heard of ones that require an application fee before they'll even let you meet their dogs. As spidermilk said, it's often the breed specific rescues that seem like they don't want anyone to adopt.

When you work in rescue, you hear all the bad stories and you can lose perspective and start to think that everyone is mistreating their dogs.

Adopting (not selling, we don't sell) to someone in the military does raise questions. But they should ask you what your plan for the animal is if you get deployed or even just posted overseas --- and then make a judgement based on your answer.

The group I volunteer with does same day adoptions, no home visits. There are a lot of questions on the application, designed to figure out if you can make a lifetime commitment to the animal and truly understand what's involved. We do lots of follow-up and have behaviorists and trainers available to talk to you about any difficulties you may have.

I'm sorry you had a bad experience, but not all rescue groups are unreasonable.

Yes, this prop is good for MO.

For one little example, lets look at new space requirements. Its really not asking that much. Its asking that the dog does not live its whole life in a cramped cage. Of course, people with 50+ breeding dogs in stacked cages don't have the required space. Fresh air and open space was not their initial concern- churning out puppies for profit was. Therefore, they're freaking out and running to every agency they can for help (including the Tea Party). "The government's gonna take away our rights to make money!"

"But its gonna cost so much!" Enforcement officials are already in place. The only difference is that inspectors can look and make immediate, identifiable infractions rather than guesswork (has this animal really had exercise in the last week?). The new laws will be more enforceable because the old laws did not have enough specifics to prosecute on.

"But-The AKC is against it!" Do they really check on EVERY dog they issue papers for to see if it is healthy and born from quality, selective husbandry practices? Last I checked, the AKC will push out papers to any licensed breeder without ever sending a representative to meet them. Of course they were against the prop. Less puppies, less papers, less fees for them to collect.

"But-the agribusiness is against it!" They believe that these regulations will encroach on their animal production practices. Yet, the food industry is quite different from the pet industry and the bill specifically targets only dogs. Agribusiness will still get to keep 50 chickens crammed into a coup. Nobody gives a crap about Chicken Little unless it involves honey BBQ sauce. Dogs are a different commodity in a very different market. Dogs come into the homes of families to become part of the family for a decade. Therefore, dog breeding in general calls for a different set of ethics.

"But- the veterinarian union is against it!" Puppy breeding means more business for animal care. Less dogs in MO? Less vets needed in MO. The union is looking out for job security.

"But, the wording isn't perfect!" Yes, there will still be irresponsible breeding, unlicensed megabreeders, people who don't spay/neuter their own pets, etc. However, if it will discourage ANYONE to go into breeding dogs solely for the bottom line, resulting in mass production of puppies, then its worth it.

Best thing it can do is take away the state's shining title, "puppy mill center of the US."

I Like Chocolate Milk!: 5 dollar milkshake:

Could you please expand on that? I donate to the ASPCA every month, but was thinking about donating to the HSUS just because it seems like the ASPCA is mostly a New York thing rather than a national thing. Just curious if you had a link on info about the HSUS not being so great. Thank you.

/work has me stuck in polite mode
//insert some obligatory Fark snark here.

If you decide to donate to HSUS, know that less than one-half of 1% of the money sent to them actually goes into pet shelters. This information was taken directly from their own tax return. You would be better off sending money to your local animal shelter if you really want to help homeless animals.

Link - HumaneWatch.org

Yes, I posted a link that someone just slagged off. Honestly, I couldn't care less about Rick Berman - HumaneWatch is right on the money with their assessments of H$U$.

How many animals could have been helped with the $2,000,000+ that H$U$ put into funding Proposition B?

Its kinda cute how you keep typing HSUS with dollar signs. Like it was a bad thing or something.

/Get over it.

zabadu: You do that. You sound more and more like a breeder every time you post.

LOL, you obviously missed the part where I said "For the record, I'm not a commercial breeder. I have 4 dogs (3 purebreds and one rescue) and one cat I rescued from a pet store that was allowing her to starve to death in the front window."

Yep, I'm one of those horrible breeders with my 4 spayed/neutered pets and my 14 month old biatch who just came out of season and wasn't bred. Wasted opportunity there, huh? Some breeder I am...

themasterdebater:
Its kinda cute how you keep typing HSUS with dollar signs. Like it was a bad thing or something.

/Get over it.

It's kinda cute to how that you ignored the point of my entire point just so you could nitpick at how I typed H$U$.

/Come back when you can actually add to the discussion.

EponymousE:
"But-The AKC is against it!" Do they really check on EVERY dog they issue papers for to see if it is healthy and born from quality, selective husbandry practices? Last I checked, the AKC will push out papers to any licensed breeder without ever sending a representative to meet them. Of course they were against the prop. Less puppies, less papers, less fees for them to collect.

The AKC doesn't even check to see if the dogs they register are purebred, so why should they care if they are quality or not? Do you own a male and a female lab, both registered, but the female got knocked up by the neighbor's mutt? Register the litter anyway and claim that it was your male that did the dirty deed. The AKC isn't going to come check out the veracity of your claim, and all you have to do is fool the buyers of the puppies into believing they are getting purebreds. Most people don't know anything about what the breed they are buying is really supposed to look like, so that usually isn't a problem.

Now let's take that litter of mutts, which happens to have six puppies. Let's register it for a litter of eight puppies instead of six. That's two extra papers for you to do anything you want. Get a labby looking mutt from the shelter, slap a paper on it and sell it for several hundred dollars? No problem. Use a paper on that female labby mutt to produce another litter of "purebred" puppies? Again, no problem. The AKC does everything solely by registration numbers, not by physical confirmation, and does *not* guarantee you are going to get a purebred from any breeder.

I Like Chocolate Milk!: zabadu: You do that. You sound more and more like a breeder every time you post.

LOL, you obviously missed the part where I said "For the record, I'm not a commercial breeder. I have 4 dogs (3 purebreds and one rescue) and one cat I rescued from a pet store that was allowing her to starve to death in the front window."

Yep, I'm one of those horrible breeders with my 4 spayed/neutered pets and my 14 month old biatch who just came out of season and wasn't bred. Wasted opportunity there, huh? Some breeder I am...

No, I didn't miss that. I could say anything I wanted about how many dogs I have. Your words "sound" like a breeder who is pissed that he's going to lose income.

Again, I said "sound" like. Your reading comprehension sucks.

I Like Chocolate Milk!: Again, who determined that having more than 50 breeding dogs makes a breeder a puppy mill? Is it a legal definition or an opinion?

The bill isn't concerned with determining who is and is not a puppy mill, I'm not sure why you're so tripped up on that particular aspect. It's concerned with making sure there are humane standards in place for breeding operations of a certain size, that size being explicitly stated in the bill. It doesn't say 'I hereby proclaim any breeder of X size is now considered a puppy mill'. It doesn't matter.

I don't know why they picked 50 as the maximum number of breeding dogs anyone can have, but 50 breeding dogs would likely produce many hundreds of dogs per year, so it's a pretty generous number, really.

zabadu:

No, I didn't miss that. I could say anything I wanted about how many dogs I have. Your words "sound" like a breeder who is pissed that he's going to lose income.

Again, I said "sound" like. Your reading comprehension sucks.

By saying that, you implied I might be a breeder. It's similar to me saying you "sound" like you have chip on your shoulder about breeders in general.

My reading comprehension is fine. It's your interpretation of what I'm saying that is skewed.

Continue to post about me, I won't see them. You are incapable of holding a discussion without insults and are not worth the time I've put into responding to you.

I Like Chocolate Milk!: zabadu:

No, I didn't miss that. I could say anything I wanted about how many dogs I have. Your words "sound" like a breeder who is pissed that he's going to lose income.

Again, I said "sound" like. Your reading comprehension sucks.

By saying that, you implied I might be a breeder. It's similar to me saying you "sound" like you have chip on your shoulder about breeders in general.

My reading comprehension is fine. It's your interpretation of what I'm saying that is skewed.

Continue to post about me, I won't see them. You are incapable of holding a discussion without insults and are not worth the time I've put into responding to you.

Ooh, are you ignoring me? YAY!

You haven't "responded" to me, you've stood on a soap box and declared "law bad". Whatever dude.

And if I "sound" like I have a chip about breeders, well damn...I DO.

alzahra: The bill isn't concerned with determining who is and is not a puppy mill, I'm not sure why you're so tripped up on that particular aspect.


Because, according to some here, "puppy mill" IS defined by this Prop as the number of breeding dogs someone has, not the conditions under which they are kept.

Personally, I do think that 50 breeding dogs and/or 10 breeding biatches is too many. I don't think that the number of dogs someone has necessarily puts them into the "puppy mill" category though. That's the trouble with the term "puppy mill" - it automatically conjures up visions of horrible abuse and inhumane treatment in most people.

I know of a show breeder out there who has at least 10 breeding biatches and multiple stud dogs too. The dogs are almost all finished Champions, have all their health clearances, live in pristine kennels with a staff that attends to them and are rotated into the house to spend time with the owner as well. They have a huge area to run and play in and receive the best food and veterinary care. This person has waiting lists for the puppies and their new homes are lined up before they are even born. There are many, many more people out there like this person. Under Prop B they are all lumped into the same category as the people who give minimal to no care to their animals.

Some people have said that this doesn't really affect them since they are already following the rules. That's true but there is still the implication that they are "puppy mills" now because they fit into the definition of the large-scale breeder as is referenced in this Prop. A high-volume breeder (defined as someone who breeds a lot of puppies) and a "puppy mill" (defined as a place where dogs are living in horrific conditions) can be two separate things but this Proposition doesn't differentiate.

This Prop did have some good points to it - changing the size requirements of the enclosures was one of them. However, most of its provisions are already covered by the Animal Care Facilities act. With the exception of the size requirements, the rest of the changes are minor and in some cases, weaken the law. For example, Prop B covers anyone with 10 or more breeding biatches. ACFA covered anyone with 3 or more breeding biatches. Prop B's penalties are steeper for most violations but will require more manpower to enforce since ALL infractions, no matter how minor (forget to put down a water bowl after cleaning - infraction), are now Class C Misdemeanors.

Side by side comparison of Prop B & ACFA regs

I Like Chocolate Milk!: alzahra: The bill isn't concerned with determining who is and is not a puppy mill, I'm not sure why you're so tripped up on that particular aspect.


Because, according to some here, "puppy mill" IS defined by this Prop as the number of breeding dogs someone has, not the conditions under which they are kept.

Personally, I do think that 50 breeding dogs and/or 10 breeding biatches is too many. I don't think that the number of dogs someone has necessarily puts them into the "puppy mill" category though. That's the trouble with the term "puppy mill" - it automatically conjures up visions of horrible abuse and inhumane treatment in most people.

I know of a show breeder out there who has at least 10 breeding biatches and multiple stud dogs too. The dogs are almost all finished Champions, have all their health clearances, live in pristine kennels with a staff that attends to them and are rotated into the house to spend time with the owner as well. They have a huge area to run and play in and receive the best food and veterinary care. This person has waiting lists for the puppies and their new homes are lined up before they are even born. There are many, many more people out there like this person. Under Prop B they are all lumped into the same category as the people who give minimal to no care to their animals.

Some people have said that this doesn't really affect them since they are already following the rules. That's true but there is still the implication that they are "puppy mills" now because they fit into the definition of the large-scale breeder as is referenced in this Prop. A high-volume breeder (defined as someone who breeds a lot of puppies) and a "puppy mill" (defined as a place where dogs are living in horrific conditions) can be two separate things but this Proposition doesn't differentiate.

This Prop did have some good points to it - changing the size requirements of the enclosures was one of them. However, most of its provisions are already covered by the Animal Care Facilities act. With the exception of the size requirements, the rest of the changes are minor and in some cases, weaken the law. For example, Prop B covers anyone with 10 or more breeding biatches. ACFA covered anyone with 3 or more breeding biatches. Prop B's penalties are steeper for most violations but will require more manpower to enforce since ALL infractions, no matter how minor (forget to put down a water bowl after cleaning - infraction), are now Class C Misdemeanors.

Side by side comparison of Prop B & ACFA regs

Side by side comparison compiled by "Alliance for the Truth", sponsored by vets and breeders.

Veterinarians



* Versailles Veterinary Clinic
* Brookfield Vet Clinic
* Kevin Harsha
* John Wade, DVM
* Michael Peters, DVM
* Red Barn Veterinary Service
* Jim Foster, DVM
* Debra Mayes, DVM
* Seth Hartter, DVM
* Split Rail Animal Clinic
* Animal Clinic of Ava
* Five Star Living, Inc.
* Affordable Veterinary Care
* J. A. Schmidt Veterinarian
* Markway Veterinary Services
* Scotland County Veterinary Clinic
* Vienna Veterinary Clinic
* Unionville Vet Clinic
* Bowling Green Veterinary Clinic
* Kesler Veterinary Services
* Bowling Green Veterinary Clinic
* Veterinarian Roger D. Hubner, DVM
* Affordable Veterinary Care



Organizations



* North Carolina Responsible Animal Owners
* A Dog's World (Grooming and Training) - Individual
* A to Z Vet Supply
* A Van Dyk, LLC
* Additudes Kennel
* All Breed Paw Prints Mobile Grooming
* Alliance For Truth
* Alliance of Chicagoland Pet Owners (ACPO)
* Alliance Zdog
* Amalis' Miniuture Schnauzer's
* America's Pet Registry Inc.
* American Brittany Club
* American Canine Association
* American Miniature Schnauzer Club Rescue
* American Whippet Club
* Amy Brackett - Individual
* Angelface Puppies
* Animal Owners Association of Texas
* Anna Harris - Individual
* Austamm Scottish Terriers
* Austin Shetland Sheepdog Club
* Avaree Clark - Invidual
* Barbary Coast Bull Terrier Club
* BBCC
* Betsy Fickel - Individual
* Betty Foreman - Individual
* Beyerpatch Marketing
* BNG Pet Food Distributors
* Boggs Summit Bulldogs
* Brenda Tisdale - breeder
* C&J Cocker's
* C&J Dog Food
* Cadillac Kennel, LLC
* Cahill's Country Kennel
* Cainine Specialty Assistance
* CALIFORNIA ANIMAL VOTERS ALLIANCE
* Capri Capital, LLC
* Car-Mir-Jac Yorkies
* CARES, Inc.
* Cat Lovers of America
* Catherine Francka - Individual
* Catren's Leather Show Accessories
* CFA
* Chaffin Vet Supply
* Charles Cambron - Individual
* Chicago Miniature Schnauzer Club Rescue
* Chow Chow Fanciers Assoc. of So. CA
* Christine Newton - Individual
* Ci Cymru Corgis
* CK Kennels
* Cleo O'Brien - Former Kennel Owner
* Coldwaterkennel
* Collie Club Of America
* Colonial Shetland Sheepdog Club
* Country Creek Farm
* Countryside Pet Supply
* Daisymead English Cockers
* DDM Miniatures
* Deborah Allen - Individual
* Debra Mayes - Individual
* Debra Shine - Licensed Breeder
* DePayne Dachshunds
* Des Moines River Kennel
* Desertwindhounds
* Diamond Doodles
* DOBA--Dog Owners & Breeders Alliance
* Donald Wagner - Individual
* Donna's Kennel
* Doug Markus - Individual
* East Texas Dog Lovers Club
* Elizabeth Chester - Individual
* Evergreen Acres
* FCA
* Firsttuesdaypress.com
* Fitzpatrick Air Pet Transportation
* Five Star Living, Inc.
* Flatt Family Farms
* Freeman Kennels
* Friesner Farms
* Full-A-Bull Kennels
* Gale Nie - Individual
* Gamblers Cove Kennel
* Gasconade Rabbit Dog Association
* Genevieve Wallace - Individual
* German Shepherd Dog Club of America
* Girard Animal Hospital
* Greater Kansas City Dog Training Club
* Greater St Louis Brittany Club
* Grooming Unlimited, LLC
* H&H Enterprizes
* Hearthside Poodles
* Heather Buffington - Individual
* Hi-Hat Boxers
* Hickory Ridge Kennel
* HILLSBORO CO.
* Hobbys Purebred Pets
* Hollicove Collies
* Howliday Inn Training and boarding
* IaFED (Iowa Federation of Animal Owners)
* indrio Pedigrees
* Iowa Pet Breeders
* IOWA PUPPIES LLC
* Irish Setter Club of American, Inc.
* J & J Handiworks
* Jean Case - Individual
* Jeff Stanton - Individual
* Jeri Krankel - Individual
* Jet Clough - Individual
* Jet Dogs
* Jim Meinhardt - Individual
* Jodeepups
* K & T Farms
* K-9 Canyon
* K-9 Kabin
* Kalebrick Farm and Kennel
* Kansas Pet Professionals, Inc.
* Kassy Cambron - Indivdual
* Katmai Chesapeakes
* KEA Farm
* Kim Watt - Individual
* Kim Wheeler - Individual
* KMA Acres Royalty Is Havanese
* Koedam Kountry Kennels
* Kristi Taylor - Individual
* Lakeside K-9 Kamp
* Lari Mertel - Ks Horse Council member
* Larka Aussies
* Lazy Daze Kennel
* LD Professional Pedigrees
* Lil Paws
* Linda Hopper - Individual
* Linda Reed - Individual
* Lindquist Care Center
* Lisa Doak - Invividual
* Lisa Pinto - Individual
* Locust Creek Farm and Kennel
* Louise Vopelak - Individual
* Lucky 13 Kennel
* Luv Kennels
* Lynn Sartin - Individual
* Macon County Patriots
* Maggie Schulte - Individual
* Making Tracks for APRI
* Marcia Behr - Individual
* Marie Modzelewski - Individual
* Marlen Kennel
* Mary Noblitt - Individual
* MaryEllen Deutschle - home kennel
* Meadowstar Ranch
* Mercedes and Me Dog Clothing
* Mesa Animal CLinic
* MFA COOP ASSN # 280
* Michael Glass - Individual
* Michele Hamilton - Individual
* Michele Smith - Individual
* Microchip ID Systems, Inc.
* Mid-Western Veterinary Supply Co.
* Middleton's Kennels
* Midnight Acres Kennel
* Minnesota Cat & Dog Council
* Mississippi Canine Coalition, Inc.
* Mississippi State American Pit Bull Terrier Club
* Missouri Agribusiness Association (MO-AG)
* Missouri Cattlemen's Association
* Missouri Equine Council
* Missouri Family Network
* Missouri Farm Bureau
* Missouri Federation of Animal Owners
* Missouri Kansas Youth Rodeo Association
* Missouri Pet Breeders Association
* Missouri Pork Association
* missouri primate foundation,inc
* Missouri Quarter Horse Association
* Missourians for Animal Care
* Monksberry Farm & Kennel
* Mor Riga's Irish Wolfhounds
* morrie's place
* Motley Kennels
* My Dog My Choice
* Nelda Cambron - Individual
* NeoTech, LLC
* New Hope Kennel
* Northridge Farm
* Northwest Kennel and The Dog House, Etc
* Ohio Association of Animal Owners
* Ohio Professional Dog Breeders Association
* Oklahoma Pet Professionals
* One of a Kind Pups
* Pamela Ohlsson - Individual
* Pat Gean - dog groomer
* Patricia Hawk - Individual
* Paula Grecco - Individual
* Paws & Tails Puppies
* PEA RIDGE KENNEL
* Peggy Schmitt - Individual
* Pennsylvania Kennel Assurance Program
* Pet Breeders And Owners
* pet delivery system
* Pet lovers association
* Pets & Company
* Phippy's Puppies & Missouri Dog Release Program
* Plasti-Crate
* Poodles Poms N More
* PreciousPaws Kennels
* Pro Med LLC
* Professional Kennel Club of Missouri
* Professional Pet Association
* Pug Palace Kennel
* Pup4u.com
* Puppy Love Haven
* Puppy Love Kennel
* QUALITY PAWS LLC
* Quincy Kennel Club
* Rainbow Farm Kennel
* Rambling Kennel
* Rebecca Evans - Individual
* Rebecca Mosshart - Individual
* Rebecca's Little Critters
* Red Oak Beagle Club
* Reid Pump and Well Drilling Service
* Renae Schuiteman - Individual
* Responsible Pet Owners Alliance
* Ridenhour Farms
* Riverside Kennels
* Roberts' Ranch Aussies
* rock'n roll french bulldogs
* Rocky Top K9's
* RSD Kennel
* s&k kennel
* SAOVA
* Serenity Acres Farm Boarding Kennel
* Shannon FitzGerald - Individual
* Shome's Black and Tans
* Show Me Beaglers
* Show-Me Labradors
* Sides Of Shamrock Kennel, LLC
* Sky Blue Ranch, Inc.
* Society for the Training and Education of Pet Professionals
* Southwest Auction Service
* Special Collies Kennel
* Stephen Tackitt - Dog breeder
* Steve Wheeler - Individual
* Summit Ash Boxers (HOBBY Show-Breeder)
* T. J. PLASTICS
* tails waggin transport
* TENDERHEART KENNEL
* Terisa Steier - Individual
* The Alabama Canine Coalition
* The American Beagler
* The Cattleman's Advocate (publisher)
* The Grass Menagerie Farm
* The International Cat Association - Legislative Chair
* The Kennel Spotlight
* The Petsberry Board Game
* Tibetan Spaniels by Mary Preston
* TICA
* Tigers' Lair Feline Fanciers
* Timbreblue Whippets
* TopNotch Kennel
* Tri-State Premier Pet Association
* Triple "C" Co-op
* Triplett T Kennels
* Troublesome Creek Kennel
* United All Breed Registry
* United All Breed Registry, Inc
* Valarie Jacobs - Invidual
* Virginia Federation of Dog Clubs and Breeders
* Washington University Young Americans for Liberty
* Wayne Walker - Individual
* Western Missouri Shooters Alliance
* Wheeler and Sons Livestock Auction
* WildWood Aviaries
* WISARK9
* wood-z-kennels
* X-Pertise American Staffordshire Terrier
* York Trucking LLC

I Like Chocolate Milk!: Because, according to some here, "puppy mill" IS defined by this Prop as the number of breeding dogs someone has, not the conditions under which they are kept.

And...who cares what 'some here' think? Has no affect on anything. The bill doesn't define 'puppy mill' it only outlines who these new regulations apply to - those breeders who have between 10-50 breeding dogs. It seems pretty obvious to me that the intent is to crack down on puppy mills, not about mischaracterizing certain people as puppy mills. If you're not a puppy mill and you're already treating your animals humanely, you have nothing to worry about.

Seems obvious that the path they're taking here to crack down on existing puppy mills and prevent new ones is to be sure there are regulations in place that require humane conditions be maintained by all breeders. Nothing in the bill indicated to me that anyone is trying to malign breeders in general or associate all breeders with puppy mills, I'm just not seeing where you're getting that at all.

We Missourians only elect DEAD Carnahans to the US Senate!

If Robin Carnahan wanted to get elected, she should have been KILLED in a FREAK ACCIDENT, like her FATHER!

Zombie Russ Carnahan for US Senate, 2012!!!

Wretched: This "campaign" was financed to a great degree by out of state animal rights "elements" - just as those in other states are/were. Yes Missouri has a large concentration of breeders and yes there are problems. However their hidden agenda will creep in during the next few years. This is just the first salvo - what "they" really want is to ultimately control and limit livestock operations. The State can't fund and enforce the laws currently on the books. Why will this change anything? Another instance of the sheeple being fleeced by special interests with hidden agendas. Happens all the time. That and - of course - I'm a steak-eating puppy-hater...

I love how you guys just buy into what the ads told you the real agenda behind this proposition is without a shred of honest evidence. I guess that's why it passed so narrowly.