# Inspection of Breeding Facilities Legislation?



## Thumper (Feb 18, 2007)

I received an email a few weeks ago, it was forwarded around to 'dog owners in Virginia', and it originated from a well known former Hav breeder here. There wasnt' much notice to email my 'opposition' as requested, it was sent around 5pm and the emails had to be sent by 9pm, of course I didn't read the email til' the next day, so I didn't vote either way...but I'm curious what your thoughts are on mandatory Inspection of Breeding Facilities?

I mean, wouldn't that deter some BYB and mills? But I'm unclear on why breeders that abide the law would be opposed? Just the general 'violation of privacy'? What do you all think?

Here is a description of the Proposition:

_Animal control officers; inspection of breeding facilities. 
Ward Armstrong 
Summary: Requires an animal control officer to make quarterly inspections of any premises in his jurisdiction where dealers breed companion animals. The animal control officer will ensure that dealers comply with state and federal standards for sanitation, licensure, and adequate care. *(HSUS bill)
This bill language makes **every** dog and cat seller in Virginia subject to quarterly inspections, without requiring due cause or a warrant.__ 
VA Code: "Dealer" means any person who in the regular course of business for compensation or profit buys, sells, transfers, exchanges, or barters companion animals. The following shall not be considered dealers: (i) any person who transports companion animals in the regular course of business as a common carrier, or (ii) any person or organization whose primary purpose is to find permanent adoptive homes for companion animals. 
Further, while USDA has 60 pages of regulations detailing precise animal care requirements, Virginia has none. How can ACOs do federal inspections when they can't do their normal jobs and aren't sufficiently trained for those? Whose inspection result governs, if federal inspectors and VA ACOs disagree? This is extraordinarily bad, poorly crafted, ill considered legislation. The bill's legal conflicts and negative policy and fiscal impacts are staggering._

_Humane investigators; appointment by circuit court. 
David Albo 
Summary: Restores the humane investigator program to its pre-2003 status. In 2003, the law was amended to limit (i) the number of humane investigators to those currently serving and (ii) the number of programs to those currently in operation. The 2003 bill allowed those appointed prior to July 1, 2003, to be reappointed for three-year terms. This bill removes the limitations placed on the program by the 2003 law. (VVAW Bill)
Reinstitutes an animal rightist volunteer vigilante force whose authority had previously sunsetted._


The good news is, that since the Michael Vick scandal here, they are trying to tighten the penalties on dogfighting. I'm not clear on whether or not this "inspection' bill was opposed or scheduled for another vote..

Kara


----------



## irnfit (Nov 21, 2006)

Kara, I agree with you. Why would a reputable breeder be against this type of law? I think it would protect their reputations ever further as being a good breeder. But I am not a breeder. Maybe it would help weed out the byb and puppy mills to some extent.


----------



## mckennasedona (Feb 20, 2007)

If I were a breeder I suppose I wouldn't mind someone coming in to my home to make sure my animals were in safe, sanitary conditions but I would fear them imposing a bunch of rules that would be hard for someone breeding from their home to implement, like concrete floors, so many square feet available per dog, etc. I don't think it would be as simple as a quick visit to make sure the house is clean.


----------



## RCKNROB (Nov 27, 2007)

This is a great bill which I hope turns into a law. In the town of Hillsville, VA they just prosecuted a man with 1000 dogs. He had a lic to sell,breed, but from what I understand it was for only 500 dogs. That was a big business. He got busted, they took the dogs and now he has nothing. Greed makes people forget what they are doing. Anyone purchasing a state license to breed and sale dogs should not mind an inspection.


----------



## mckennasedona (Feb 20, 2007)

RCKNROB, I agree with you wholeheartedly when it comes to large scale breeding operations. I am totally against those no matter what. 
What about the breeders like the majority on this list who show their dogs in conformation and breed them? The difficult part for me is that I doubt the animal control agencies will have seperate rules for those who have large scale operations and those who breed for non-monetary reasons and breed for the love of and to improve their particular breed. I know when AB1634 was being hotly contested here in CA, there were going to be some pretty stiff costs for mandatory licenses and some pretty stiff restrictions to the point that my breeder, and most others, would either leave the state or get out of the hobby completely.


----------



## Tom King (Aug 2, 2006)

We're not quite in VA. but we can throw a rock into it from here. I'm all for it.


----------



## Thumper (Feb 18, 2007)

I guess these new proposals are just written SO broadly. I don't think I would mind inspections if I were a breeder, it would probably close some unscrupulous types, but I was just wondering what everyone's thoughts are on the matter.

I know that the Michael Vick scandal here is probably what spurred these new proposals to tighten up things. Not to mention the few puppy mill raids here in Virginia the last few months.

Kara


----------



## Gableshavs (Jun 19, 2007)

I'm for it too, it protects the animals. But I think the part about every dog breeder is subject to inspection without due cause or a warrant very scary, govt is getting out of hand, too much power leads to abuse or power. I think I'd just stop breeding in VA and find somewhere else to live. They accept a bill into law that's so poorly crafted that it can never be enforced. This leads to abuse. It leads to good honest citizens being abused. Did these people who wrote the law consult animal people, rescue groups, vets, dog club representatives and show breeders? I bet they didn't. 

Susan, since yesterday when our commission in Miami passed tighter animal control restrictions, our dog club show chair is calling for all dog people to boycott the Miami area for dog shows. Perhaps when this town doesn't get the huge revenue we bring in they'll give dog people more respect. Of course they really care about their baseball stadium they're trying to build more than the dogs.

It started in California, now Virginia, Florida and states across the nation. What's it going to be like in the end? Will the only place you can get a dog be a pet shop?


----------



## SMARTY (Apr 19, 2007)

I am in favor of anything that protects the dogs, cats, birds or whatever. A lot of the time it is getting the right people to enforce the laws or programs, people knowing what abuse is and what is not. We had a situation where someone lost her dogs, who were very well cared for and were in great condition because she had 3 too many for her location. She had 6 Chihuahuas. The neighbor that reported her had 3 Dobermans. Common since should rule.


----------



## BeverlyA (Oct 29, 2006)

I live in Nebraska and we have inspection laws. Unfortunately, we have exactly 1 inspector for the entire state. This same inspector is in charge of all the livestock facilities in the state, along with other duties. I don't want to quote the wrong numbers, but I believe the last time I checked, there were well over 700 facilities on the list of places to be checked. 

Obviously a BYB or a puppymill flying under the radar by turning in paperwork and not getting neighborhood complaints has very little chance of ever being inspected.

Here in Lincoln, the Republicans on our city council are attempting to get a mandatory spay/nueter/microchip program going.

Beverly


----------



## Rita (Jan 1, 2007)

Kara,

Thanks for the post. Maybe other states will follow. I think it is great.


----------



## Tom King (Aug 2, 2006)

I'm copying and pasting my response to the same discussion on the other thread:

I think that the legislation proposed in the past year or two has been overboard on expectations. However, there is a REAL overpopulation problem and I don't see how it's not possible not to do something. As a breeder, I have no problem with the inspections if it will help the poor dogs in puppymills and other such situations. Either they have to inspect everyone or no one. I would welcome the inspections to expose some of the abuse. If they gave schedules of when they were coming it would be too easy for the hoarders to hide some animals.

What is meant by the phrase "hard to get" about the license? I don't think it should be easy to get. Just look at all the new Havanese breeders who have jumped in the last couple of years, many of which have no idea what they are doing and are breeding anything with papers and plumbing.

Just this week in our local newspaper there was a front page article about some badly abused and malnourished horses. I'm sick of it.
__________________


----------



## Elaine (Jan 17, 2007)

You know that I am all for inspection of the puppy mill facilities but I really would not want the government coming into my home, where my dogs are raised, and doing an inspection. You have to realize that they will want to follow the USDA guidlines for inspection and that means that my dogs can not be in my home, my mothers can not give birth next to my bed, and my puppies can not be raised where we live, and the dogs could not enjoy the astro turf and play area together. I would have to build outside kennel runs, they would have to have concrete on the floor, the mom's would have to whelp out there and I could not bring the puppies in. A home is not an environment that can be sterilized according to them. They can come into my home, and all of my puppy owners know how great my dogs have it, they can make up any lies they want and take any of my dogs because it is in the name of any bill the government passes. I would love to see many backyard breeders and puppy mills closed down but I don't know how the gov. can hit just them. I also know that the gov. even for a while, and may still, supported the Haunt Corporation, not sure how to spell it, and they pump out lots of dogs for pet shops. I think they need to ban any dog being sold in a pet store in every city across the U.S., that would stop some of the breeding. I don't have the answers but I also don't want to give up dog shows and my breeding program because PETA & HSUS want to eliminate all domestic animals. I love my dogs and don't ever want to have to keep them in an outside kennel for fear I might get caught with them in my home. My dogs live in a clean safe environment, they are loved and cared for and selectively bred. Our county passed a law simular to AB1634 and I tried to fight it but the A/R people are very strong and have lots of funds to fight us. Once a bill gets put into law the language of the bill can be changed as it goes. They don't look at just specific areas to attack they go for everything they can get and than some. In 9 years of breeding Havanese I am so proud of my breeding program and the government will at some point stop me and all breeders. The government won't know they are doing it because the A/R people are very sly and use all the negative things they can to show how bad all breeders are. I would love to see the dog fighting and all the animal abuse stopped, but we can't even stop the killing and abuse of people how to we expect the world to believe there are a lot of good breeders out there. Sorry, I didn't mean for it to get so long. I know it is hard for people to realize how our rights are being taken away one thing at a time because of all that is bad in this world, and the bad people are the ones that always speak out the loudest.


----------



## Tom King (Aug 2, 2006)

I certainly wouldn't want to leave any new law completely up to the legislators to figure out and certainly there will have to be some give and take. That's where ours voices can count. If some of us breeders aren't willing to give in a bit then there will be no change. It would never pass to be able to inspect some breeders and not others. Our dogs are raised in our house to, although they do have their own complex but no "kennel runs". I would be willing to use our setup as a model and agree to have news people, legislators or their assistants come for a visit, and anyone or whatever would be required to help the process. The current laws dealing with animal abuse are not enough since the problem is just getting larger all the time.

I'm not in any way surportive of any of the extremists like PETA and what HSUS is becoming.

If every breeder had to pay a licensing fee of a thousand or two dollars it would cover the cost and not be a further burden on taxpayers. To pay such a fee and agree to inspections would be a small price to pay. It would probably be the end to a lot of sideline breeders and there would be some casualties I'm sure but hopefully most of the casualties would be in the number of unwanted animals produced.


----------



## Gableshavs (Jun 19, 2007)

Well Tom, the fee here is to get a hobby breeder's license has been $25.00 for life, that's changing but the older established breeders are grandfathered in. It's only hard to get a license because of red tape involved, Animal Control was not issuing licenses for the past two years. So BYB's were having litters without licenses. They did what they want, no consequences. Now the law is changed we'll see what happens. Do you honestly think it stopped any backyard breeders? Go to herald.com and see how many pets are advertised and I'm sure very few are licensed hobby breeders. We have a very huge problem with dogs abandoned every day; some go to animal control but many are just discarded in the Redlands, our farming area. A small group of us (in comparision to the 2 million people who live here) rescue animals, and care for our animals like family. Others don't consider them very important so they live outside, barking all night, or tethered near the front door. Our county commission wants changes but doesn't fund Animal Control so we only have a few officers working to enforce laws. It's quite a problem, and instead of enlisting our help the commission put tighter restrictions on the only honest people because the others will continue to scoff the law and do what they want and without proper staff the laws just don't get enforced. Another problem is that the general public does not even know the law exists and there has been no effort to educate them so far.


----------



## jillnors2 (Apr 12, 2007)

> You know that I am all for inspection of the puppy mill facilities but I really would not want the government coming into my home, where my dogs are raised, and doing an inspection.


I don't think you can have it both ways.


----------



## mckennasedona (Feb 20, 2007)

If laws like these pass, breeders like many on this board will abide by the laws because they are decent, law abiding citizens who want to do what's right. It will NOT stop the Michael Vick's of the world because they will find a way to circumvent the law by buying puppies from out of state or out of the country. I just don't see some lowlife who breeds pit bulls lining up at the county animal control office to apply for a breeder's permit. The very puppy millers they are trying to shut down will be the ones who CAN afford the permits and will clean up just enough to pass the inspections or will pad enough pockets to pass the inspections regardless of whether they are clean or not.


----------



## Shada (Feb 4, 2007)

I am all for regulations for ALL breeders to abide by.

These pups need us to look after them!
The good breeders will have nothing to worry about, or to hide.

The bad breeders will hopefully, have a deterrant to stop their inhumane acts. Or to pay for their actions. They need to know that certain practices are unacceptable, and will be dealt with.

No it will not help all, but it will help many.


----------



## Thumper (Feb 18, 2007)

Thanks for everyone's opinion. I really didnt' have one on this issue one way or the other when I read the legislation, but I do see both 'sides' of the story, so to speak.

We always complain about BYB and mills, and of course want legislation to help STOP them, but at the same time, the proposed legislation appears to be disturbing to the ethical breeders, too. So where is the middle ground? I suppose with any other legislation, some people are helped and others..not so much. Can't please everyone, ehh? 

And I agree, where there is a will..there is a way. The Michael Vick's of the world will squirm around the law, and the unethical breeders will most likely do the same..all about the almighty dollar bill.

Kara


----------

