Do this now or loose your rights! Sign the petition!

[FCspringer]

http://www.akc.org/petition/

Join AKC's fight! Sign it or loose your right to choose a quality dog from responsible breeders around the world! This is a serious deal. Ask a gun dog breeder in WI if you don't believe.

[springerspeed]

Signed

[Abndoc]

I was signer #35299

[GSP4ME]

number35425

[BLACKJACK]

When I see the part that reads 'more than 4 breeding females' it makes me NOT want to sign, if I call a breeder and they have 5 females I think 'puppy mill'. Explain to me why I'm wrong.

[TylerS]

When I see the part that reads 'more than 4 breeding females' it makes me NOT want to sign, if I call a breeder and they have 5 females I think 'puppy mill'. Explain to me why I'm wrong.

I don't think you can put a number as to what constitutes a puppy mill.

What if a reputable breeder who titles their dogs and is considered highly sought were running more than four breeding females at a time and producing some truly remarkable puppies. Would that be constituted as a puppy mill in your eyes? If a breeder were to go through the trouble to train and title their dogs to prove their worth, and then wants to breed them, I see no problem with that, no matter how many they have.

[kentuck_ike]

They need to define breeding female. In the states version a few years ago 20 wks was considered a breeding female. We won't breed a female until they are 2 yrs and passed all the clearances and proven themselves in the field. When we are adding a breeding female it is not uncommon for us to have 2 or 3 we keep for 2 yrs intending that only the best one will be added to the breeding program and the other will be sold. We also have 4 or 5 females at all times and we only have 3 litters a year. I only like to breed them 2 out of 3 yrs. So we have 3 litters out 4 dogs a year. I know of more than 1 puppy mill breeding on every heat cycle. This means 2 litters a year per female or six litters a year. So I feel this bill will hurt the responsible breeder and create less competition for the pup mills.

[Jeffstally]

When I see the part that reads 'more than 4 breeding females' it makes me NOT want to sign, if I call a breeder and they have 5 females I think 'puppy mill'. Explain to me why I'm wrong.

Highly respectable full time breeders are going to have significantly more than 4 breeding females.

To me, a puppy mill is a bunch of uncared for dogs in poor living conditions cranking out puppies for nothing but profit. Many highly reputable breeders have 50 or even 100 dogs, but those dogs are taken care of and have clean living conditions and maintain a staff to help with the animals.

[FCspringer]

When I see the part that reads 'more than 4 breeding females' it makes me NOT want to sign, if I call a breeder and they have 5 females I think 'puppy mill'. Explain to me why I'm wrong.

You must be joking! Are you sure you like fine gun dogs? if not don't sign..... It says in tact females if you read... I have one that is 9, not going to be bred any more. One that is 4, had 1 litter, in heat now, not breeding her so she can run fall trials and Nationals since she is qualified. 1, 1 year old in training, that may or may not ever be bred, sold who knows, hips can't be done till 2. I have 2 pups to be here soon to start, all in tact. I run frickin trials. Doge are good at 3-7 years old average. so at 5 and 4 it's time to think ahead or go a few years not running. I am a serious hobby breeder that does all the heath testing needed. I guess in your eyes I am a puppy mill. By all means don't sign and get your pups from news paper un health tested trash from a bunch of mutts. Or just plan adopting puppy mill waste cause thats all that this bill "Won't " Affect... The last 3 females I had as pups were sold because I did not want them for a future foundation dog... Think a puppy miller would do that??? Get a clue...

[FCspringer]

PS no pups in 2012, your right, I must be a puppy mill. Just a very bad one...

This will affect every good breeder on the planet people! Not the puppy mills...... If this bill was in place I would not own the dog I am running in the National 2 years in a row. Cause I would not drive that far to buy one. Think hard before you support or allow such rubbish to pass...

[brittman]

FCSpringer. Assume you are not in the fund raising or promotion business.

I agree it is difficult to put a number on breeding age females in one kennel. But I would call out a breeder as a puppy mill if he has more than say 12 breeding age female dogs across more than two breeds of dogs running in kennels that are not clean and well kept.

Sure a good breeder maybe running more than a dozen litters a year, but I am not sure than makes him any better than the guy with 3-4 carefully planned litters a year.

Do your research. If it is a repeat breeding, talk to owners of dogs out of prior litters.

Go visit their kennel (operations). Clean coats, trimmed toe nails, and a good waste management system in-place are great signs. Any dog pulled from the kennel should be happy and well trained to the breeders commands. If a dog does not know what to do when out of the cage ... puppy mill.

[LABS4ME]

There in lies the problem with govt. intervention and creation of laws... it is not one size fits all. I know a couple of select breeders who have 12 or more females, and no, they are not puppy mills. Not going to call out whom is who, but I can assure you these dogs get better care than the majority of dogs on the planet.

It is not a number of females that determines a puppy mill, it is the operation! Quit arbitrarily setting numbers and making everyone and everything fit in the same box. Go after the puppy mills... shut them down. Puppy Mills continue to flourish solely because buyers are too apethetic to educate themselves on where the dog is sourced from. If there was not markets for those puppies, there would not be puppy mills. Pet shops should have to prove to buyers the source of pups. That is the easiest way for puppy mills to peddle there product. the pet shop... totally anonymus whom the breeder was/is and the backround of the puppy and the breeding... but hey! it's got AKC papers so it must be good. NOT!

It should be fine to legally require things of kennel operations, ie: vaccinations, annual physicals, waste disposal system etc. proper living conditions, etc. Barring that, there is not much else the govt. should be involved with. The puppy millers WILL find away around this. example: They will do multiple locations under multiple kennel names and nothing in the end will change... just like gun control... only the legal guys will feel the ramifications.

Buyers need to educate themselves on whom they are buying their dog from... the AKC needs to quit worrying about it's pocket book and create mandatory breeding requirements for all registered litters and all this would be a mute point... more govt. control and creation of laws, is the incessant erosion of YOUR liberties! This will solve nothing and create a harder environment for those who are out there trying to do it right.

Good Luck!

Ken

[MuleShack]

There in lies the problem with govt. intervention and creation of laws... it is not one size fits all. I know a couple of select breeders who have 12 or more females, and no, they are not puppy mills. Not going to call out whom is who, but I can assure you these dogs get better care than the majority of dogs on the planet.

It is not a number of females that determines a puppy mill, it is the operation! Quit arbitrarily setting numbers and making everyone and everything fit in the same box. Go after the puppy mills... shut them down. Puppy Mills continue to flourish solely because buyers are too apethetic to educate themselves on where the dog is sourced from. If there was not markets for those puppies, there would not be puppy mills. Pet shops should have to prove to buyers the source of pups. That is the easiest way for puppy mills to peddle there product. the pet shop... totally anonymus whom the breeder was/is and the backround of the puppy and the breeding... but hey! it's got AKC papers so it must be good. NOT!

It should be fine to legally require things of kennel operations, ie: vaccinations, annual physicals, waste disposal system etc. proper living conditions, etc. Barring that, there is not much else the govt. should be involved with. The puppy millers WILL find away around this. example: They will do multiple locations under multiple kennel names and nothing in the end will change... just like gun control... only the legal guys will feel the ramifications.

Buyers need to educate themselves on whom they are buying their dog from... the AKC needs to quit worrying about it's pocket book and create mandatory breeding requirements for all registered litters and all this would be a mute point... more govt. control and creation of laws, is the incessant erosion of YOUR liberties! This will solve nothing and create a harder environment for those who are out there trying to do it right.

Good Luck!

Ken

I was going to come on here and type something in the line of what labs said, but he stated it so well that i'm just quoting him.

It shouldn't be about the numbers, as long as the breedings are spoken for and the dogs dont end up going up for adoption because one outfit churns out too many. If the breeders take care of all the animals they are responsible for and create litters that they know they have buyers for then i dont see a problem.

It is considered a business whether you are a one dog breeder or 20 dog breeder so i would be in favor of some regulation there like sanitary conditions, environment, indoors, plenty of attention and not locked in a crate or cage all day. If the dogs have the same "decent" life as a regular dog then I dont see any problems.

However kicking puppies out of the same female twice a year I guess is another story, but how is that enforced?

[brittman]

If the breeder is registering the dogs ... pretty easy to know if the dog has a litter every heat cycle. Even that may not be a bad thing if it is two in a row, then some time off. I would leave that up to the breeder and vets.

I have been on the grounds of a MN Made puppy mill down near Trimont. It was sad to say the least. Amongst the small dogs, they had labs and goldens there too.

Let's go above 12 for some discussion. If a guy has 20 breeding females and a couple stud dogs... remember in that the female kicks in 50% of the genetic markers/traits ... does he really have proven hunting stock dogs ... well maybe ??? Or maybe it is more of a money thing trying to profit off his one field champ dog ?? Fine it is America, but buyer beware !!!

[brittman]

Asking a couple questions. Please don't coil up and get all defensive - just answer the questions.

Those of you that know these super-breeders.

Do they wait to breed their females until after they pass their 2 year birthday so that their hips are OFA certified - normal ??

Are all breeding females trained to a basic level of understanding commands and basic field performance (or better). If they are upland dogs: noses and range proven, understood and documented. Pointers proven to point?

or are they just paper pedigee dogs ?

[PurpleFloyd]

FCSpringer. Assume you are not in the fund raising or promotion business.

I agree it is difficult to put a number on breeding age females in one kennel. But I would call out a breeder as a puppy mill if he has more than say 12 breeding age female dogs across more than two breeds of dogs running in kennels that are not clean and well kept.

Sure a good breeder maybe running more than a dozen litters a year, but I am not sure than makes him any better than the guy with 3-4 carefully planned litters a year.

Do your research. If it is a repeat breeding, talk to owners of dogs out of prior litters.

Go visit their kennel (operations). Clean coats, trimmed toe nails, and a good waste management system in-place are great signs. Any dog pulled from the kennel should be happy and well trained to the breeders commands. If a dog does not know what to do when out of the cage ... puppy mill.

Go get 'em Kenny.

[Tom7227]

What is is about the regulations that are troublesome? Seems like this thread so far has become a somewhat acrimonious debate about what is/isn't a puppy mill. Just what is it about the USDA regs that creates the issue? Just asking, not trying to argue or start an argument. I would like to learn what is behind the concern.

Thanks for your time.

Tom

[cavalierowner]

Tom, I have two problems with the bill. As background, my wife and I show and breed Cavalier King Charles Spaniels. Not exactly hunting dogs, but it's the same theory.

One is the number of breeding females. In my breed, we are trying to resolve a heart issue, so we don't breed until 2-1/2 years old and all health clearances are in. That means that if we are to have more than 1 litter a year (and an average litter is only 4 pups), we need more than 4 breeding age females. We are also showing some of our girls in conformation, so we won't be breeding those. And we also have some retired girls that we become attached to and can't rehome.

The other problem is the USDA regulations. Our dogs are also family pets and live in the house with us. The only time they are crated is at night...well except for the 4 that sleep with us!! If we have to comply with USDA regulations, we would have to house our dogs in a kennel building separate from our house, which is not even remotely acceptable to us. OR, we would have to put non-porous panels on the walls, floors and ceilings of the living room with at least 2 floor drains in the floor so the living room could be washed down. So if we complied with USDA, we actually would look like a puppy mill.

Finally, we are already inspected once a year under our license with the City. We don't need more government controls. In fact, the animal control person who inspects has told us a couple times that she wishes some single animal pet owners kept their dogs as good as we do.

I hope this answers your question. To someone who is not actively involved in breeding, I'm sure the bill looks reasonable on the surface as a way to control puppy mills. Problem is, the writers of the bills don't seem to have a clue about reputable breeding. No one wants to shut down puppy mills more than me. We also do Cavalier Rescue and we have seen the result of those d**n puppy mills! If the government really wants to shut down puppy mills, they need to do more and unannounced inspections. Heck, I'm inspected more often than the puppy mills! OK, gotta stop now before I get too wound up LOL

[BLACKJACK]

FCSPRINGER, you still haven't convinced me to sign the petition. When people start getting over 4-5-6-10 dogs you have to wonder how much individual attention they're getting, odds are some of the non-favorates, the breeders, are spending 23 1/2 hours a day in their kennels. Yes you might be the exception, all your dogs might be well socialized and happy, but the majority of people, if they get too many dogs around, I'm going to say 'puppy mill', they're just in it for the money.

In 5 years when I start looking for a replacement for my 9 year old lab, even if this law passes, I don't think I'll have a problem finding a good pup from a reputable breeder.

[cavalierowner]

In 5 years when I start looking for a replacement for my 9 year old lab, even if this law passes, I don't think I'll have a problem finding a good pup from a reputable breeder.

My fear is that you MAY be buying not so much from a reputable breeder, but from a BYB (backyard breeder). A BYB (for those who have never heard the term) is someone with two or three dogs who wants to breed to make a couple bucks or for the "experience" or for a number of other misguided reasons. A BYB is someone who has no idea of health testing and just throws a couple dogs together and hopes for the best. Even worse, they may have little, if any, experience and don't know anything about proper nutrition for the pregnant or nursing girl. Or if something starts going wrong during whelping, they don't recognize it and lose the puppies/girl.

Worse than even a BYB is the broker for a puppy mill that brings a couple girls with their litters to their home and masquerades as a reputable breeder. That's typically how the puppy mills work. Those are the ones that are really hard to spot.

USDA inspections are not going to stop the puppy mills, they are mostly under USDA control now and do very little. What it is going to do is put a lot of the good breeders out of business because they can't afford to build kennels or zoning (as in my case) won't allow it. I sincerely hope that you are able to get a pup in the future from a reputable breeder and aren't unknowingly scammed by a BYB or broker.

[LABS4ME]

FCSPRINGER, you still haven't convinced me to sign the petition. When people start getting over 4-5-6-10 dogs you have to wonder how much individual attention they're getting, odds are some of the non-favorates, the breeders, are spending 23 1/2 hours a day in their kennels. Yes you might be the exception, all your dogs might be well socialized and happy, but the majority of people, if they get too many dogs around, I'm going to say 'puppy mill', they're just in it for the money.

In 5 years when I start looking for a replacement for my 9 year old lab, even if this law passes, I don't think I'll have a problem finding a good pup from a reputable breeder.

Problem is... a lot of the 'reputable' breeders get their foundation stock from the 'well to do' field trialer/breeder/trainer who has maybe a dozen to two dozen dogs... this could severely impact those operations. The end result is less 'good' pups going out to your 'reputable' breeders to raise their dogs to be breeders to sell you a pup. Trust me, very few of said 'reputable' breeders have foundation stock that they developed on their own without going to a big, well known, trusted line to start out with or to breed back to.

And the size of those operations has little to do with how they are socialized, treated or campaigned. I know of a few that vary between 20 and 30 dogs. All dogs are run multiple times every day, fed a great diet, trained, many trialed, socialized blah blah blah... no different than what I do with my 2-4 dogs I have. I know of at least two that size that are owned by veternarians. The way they are able to maintain a kennel of this size is with hired kennel help. They have paid employees to help keep the operation going. Yes it is a business and yes, they need to make money to keep things rolling, but in the end I really believe money is less important to them than many 'small' breeders. I have zero qualms getting a pup from these places and have done so. I have bred my females to studs from these operations also. If you believe the amount of dogs a breeder keeps determines if they are a 'reputable' breeder, you are misguided. You should examine where the dogs in your dog's pedigree came from and the size of those kennels. Even if it is back 3 or 4 generations, it has a bearing on IF your dog came to be.

It is in these breeders/trialers best interest to produce THE BEST dogs they can. If they don't their operations cease to exist. They take pride in what they achieve and have worked hard sometimes for decades to produce a line of dogs that they can call their own. I see no reason for these rules and regulations other than it is again the govt. trying to do 'right' by passing sweeping rules that in the end will not put puppy mills out of business. It is identical to the Mayor and Police Chief of Mpls saying we need more gun control laws to end senseless killing of children like the 5 year old that was just killed in his living room last weekend. Do you think the shooter will ever give a rip about any gun control law that is passed?

We need the govt. to produce and enforce laws for animal abuse, and the AKC to put realistic minimums in place to breed a litter of pups that are eligible to be registered. In todays computer age that would be very easy to do. We need the buying public to be more educated on what they are buying and where it came from. Take away the 'demand' for puppy mill puppies and they will quickly disappear.

In the end no amount of legislation will end puppy mills, the slimey breeders will ALWAYS find away around each and every law passed, they don't care any more about the law than they do about the dogs in their charge. They will just get slimier circumventing the law. But creating more regualtions may in the end make a reputable breeder just give up. That is exactly what we don't need.

Good Luck!

Ken

[brittman]

My fear is that you MAY be buying not so much from a reputable breeder, but from a BYB (backyard breeder). A BYB (for those who have never heard the term) is someone with two or three dogs who wants to breed to make a couple bucks or for the "experience" or for a number of other misguided reasons.

If you look around the net you can see some pretty high end breeders offering their stud dog out for a fee. Enables the BYB ?

Would hope they guys follow the same set of "rules" that they follow on their own kennel's breeding and not out for a quick couple bucks.

[Tom7227]

I am still wondering what the issue is.

What does the USDA require now in terms of the number of dogs in order to meet the rules?

There are complaints here about the lack of action by the USDA. That could be an issue of the priorities set by the organization, budget (which ultimately is controlled by Congress), probably many other things.

What do the regs require and how much would it cost to comply?

It's obvious that any rule of this sort is going to start with a definition of who is covered. Just as obvious folks with one dog above the limit are going to be unhappy, and frankly there will be folks with one dog under the limit that shouldn't be allowed to grow a cockroach.

IMO folks get a little nutso when it comes to dogs. (Don't even start with the cat people.) I find it incredible when I read articles about people going to other states and gathering dogs and bringing them up here to 'save' them. Sorry, but if Kansas City or New Orleans, or Podunk has a lot of strays running around that's their problem.

Of course now I have tossed in a whole nother subject to get folks stirred up about. Sorry.

[cavalierowner]

If you look around the net you can see some pretty high end breeders offering their stud dog out for a fee. Enables the BYB ?

Would hope they guys follow the same set of "rules" that they follow on their own kennel's breeding and not out for a quick couple bucks.

I can't speak for other breeders, but you can bet your last dollar we require all the health tests that are required/recommended for our breed and some kind of proof they know what they are doing. We actually don't advertise stud service from our boys, but we do get calls now and then from people wanting to breed their girl who really don't have an idea what breeding is all about. They are usually easy to spot because they have a girl in season now and need stud service NOW. We have a checklist of things we require that we go over on the phone with them. In the years that we have been breeding, we have only provided stud service to established breeders we know to be reputable because the BYB's have not been able to show us what we want for us to provide stud service. The only exception to breeding to established breeders was a person who was showing their dog for about a year and we mentored her.

But I'm getting off topic. The fact is that we already have laws in place that should shut down the mills, but they don't work because there's no real enforcement. Making more laws like the one proposed will only hurt the small breeders and won't affect the mills at all. They have the knowledge and financial resources to dodge the laws.

[cavalierowner]

I am still wondering what the issue is.

What does the USDA require now in terms of the number of dogs in order to meet the rules?

There are complaints here about the lack of action by the USDA. That could be an issue of the priorities set by the organization, budget (which ultimately is controlled by Congress), probably many other things.

What do the regs require and how much would it cost to comply?

It's obvious that any rule of this sort is going to start with a definition of who is covered. Just as obvious folks with one dog above the limit are going to be unhappy, and frankly there will be folks with one dog under the limit that shouldn't be allowed to grow a cockroach.

IMO folks get a little nutso when it comes to dogs. (Don't even start with the cat people.) I find it incredible when I read articles about people going to other states and gathering dogs and bringing them up here to 'save' them. Sorry, but if Kansas City or New Orleans, or Podunk has a lot of strays running around that's their problem.

Of course now I have tossed in a whole nother subject to get folks stirred up about. Sorry.

Tom, see my post at 6:19 a.m. right after your post for how I would be adversely affected by this. I don't know how much a separate kennel building would cost to build that is heated, air conditioned, hot & cold water, a drainage system, etc.; $30,000? $40,000? Your guess is as good as mine. But that's immaterial because the City zoning wouldn't allow it anyway. The reality is that I will be out of business if this passes and I have to get rid of all but 4 of my dogs. And so will literally every breeder in my breed that I feel is reputable.

BTW, I happen to agree with you about imported rescues. We don't do that, the rescue we are a part of have people in every state. I and our rescue also don't agree with buying dogs from the mills in the name of rescue; at some point the rescue may be the mill's best customer.

And yes, I sometimes do get a little nutso about my dogs

[870Express]

I keep thinking of those Ben O. Williams clips you see with 8 or 9 brits out West pointing, honoring and then all relocating to pin down covey after covey, hill after hill. And doing it every day. I'd be hard to believe he has less than 4 breeding-age females and I can't imagine a better possible life for a dog. I don't want to live under a gov where that can't happen.

I don't want my brit to know that exists or next time he's without ecollar I have a feeling he'd take off West without me.

[FCspringer]

Let me speak English then. Labs/Ken your a wise man. First off it does not state breedable dogs, "intact" don't forget that stupid tactic by anti's right there.... Also it refers to INTERNET sales... God forbid many great reputable breeders have a dang website, "BIG frickin deal" it is the 20th century... Also it states you will have to have the potential buyer come to your place... What that will affect is any reputable breeder trial campaigner or gun dog buyer, not have the ability to have a future foundation dog or great gun dog from some of the greatest breeding, flown in from one side of the nation to the other or from Canada, the UK or else where. Many like to keep the "British tradition " alive in their breeding programs... I want the choice to buy a pup or dog from whom I want, when I want, where I want... The USDA does not know my dogs better then I do PERIOD... Nor any one Else's. It seems Communism is alive and well in the US if you wish to support this rubbish. More Gov control points to just that. I believe in freedom, and the right to produce the best gun dogs I can. Along with the health testing we do and the 36 month health guarantee, I will now add the stipulation that every pup will have to be pre registered with AKC only. And the prospective new owner will sign this petition while in affect.. Or you will look else where for a dog. I have to choose my family's better it seems. The ones that believe in the American sportsman's right only. We did stick to hunting homes till now, but we feel this does not ask much more. It will be detrimental to the best of the best of every gun dog breed in the US Canada and the UK. Why on Gods green earth would they not let me buy a dog and have it flown in sight not seen from some of the best proven blood lines in the world, to keep the tradition of fine gun dogs alive. You may be a few not supporting AKC, and all great gun dog breeders every where. But lets point the finger back at you. What makes you right over the thousands and thousands and growing signers along with AKC the foundation of all great gun dogs in this Nation... Toss out the breeder that keeps an entire litter to find the best one or two to reproduce great dogs, and sell the rest as hunting / house dogs. I wish to do that from time to time. Do you think for one second a puppy miller will do that? Get real man. I know many great breeders that do. This will be very bad for them and you in the long haul. If a USDA ding bat thinks he knows my dogs better then me sight un seen, he has a big gap of air between his ears and so does any one who would support it, I say again such rubbish. The gun dog hall of fame will no longer be the same I guess if this passes. But you will be able to still buy a puppy from un proven dogs in the news paper from a back yard breeder who thinks he has the best dog on earth.. I ask compared to what???? the last 1 or 2 he owned and bred to his buddy's dog he bred with no real proven ability other then a few hunting trips and no heath testing???. Serious people in these games have a passion for "IMPROVING" the breed. And doing so against hundreds of dogs, not just 1 or 2 you and your buddy have seen in a life time... If I miss spelled any thing I apologize in advance.

[brittman]

Whoa (pun intended). Way too long a post FCS. You lost 95% of your potetnial readers in the 1st paragraph. Well I guess I meant sentance, since your post is one dang long paragraph.

FCS I tend to agree with what you are trying to say. I have had first class dogs from solid bird dog stock. Some I have picked out and some have been flown to me sight unseen. I enjoy hunting with dogs and training dogs, but do not confuse that with the need to "clone" or breed them.

Often legistlation starts extreme in order to find some compromised ground that works more most. Hopefully that is the case here.

[FCspringer]

Heres a short one. If you were lost here or one of the other posts by another, most likely, you did not read the whole legislation either.

[FCspringer]

Another short one. You can not legislate stupidity!