Open Letter re; PAWS
Monday, August 1, 2005
Dear Senators, AKC and Committee members, and the Public!
I am a long time breeder of Show poodles and obedience dogs. I
am very concerned about the PAWS bill and how it will affect my
breeding program. Even though I do not breed "the numbers" that
are reflected in the bill, I do co-own dogs and have a young
stud dog, so adding numbers, I could at some time in the future
be affected by the Numbers as stated in the bill. I strictly
home raise my litters when I have pups and sell only to the
public on limited registration.
I am not sure who the PAWS bill is supposed to regulate. Large
corporations like the Hunte group already fall under USDA
regulations. They are the largest regulated source of puppies in
the US. If the object is to have fewer animals in shelters this
bill will not help that! The only way to have fewer animals in
shelters is to have massive spay-neuter campaigns.
I was an animal control officer in Scotland County NC for many
years. Puppies were adopted out (and still are) that were too
young to spay or neuter, and there was not enough staff to
follow behind and see that those adopted pups were neutered. So
eventually they came back to the shelter with litters of pups!!!
THERE is the problem!!!! I know that for a fact as I was the
officer that brought in the pups in the first place. Shelters
are about saving lives.... they should be about stopping
breeding of unwanted puppies and kittens.
Every shelter in the US should have mandatory neutering before
animals leave the premises. Yes, this would be difficult with
young ones because they have to reach the age of safe surgery.
Yes it would be a burden in the beginning. But unless a shelter
has the staff to go and collect young animals at the exact time
they are due for surgery, these animals slip through un-spayed
or un-neutered and they are the very animals responsible for our
over crowded shelters!!!
If the senator truly wants to regulate breeders, show breeders
are not the ones being irresponsible.
The AKC is not representing the SHOW breeders of America...they
did not even put the issue to the delegates for a vote on the
stand they are taking with the PAWS bill.
The delegates represent the show giving clubs.
Has any one taken into consideration the far reaching economic
impact of this type of regulation?? Breeders, vets, pet food
sellers, groomers, boarding kennels.. all will be impacted by a
potentially reduced number of animals. (Unless the puppy mills
temporarily take up the slack.) Jobs, including mine will be
impacted. The small shop where I groom took in $125,000 in
grooming last year. Only 2 groomers. If my clients are not able
to access nice quality animals (dogs and cats) they are not
likely to replace them as they age which is about every 12
years.
What will I then do for a living? I have devoted 40 years of my
life to proper grooming and quality show poodles, and wonderful
well bred healthy pets. Has the AKC actually shown economic
figures to the committee?
Where are the imported dogs coming from that need regulated???
Where are the "breeders" that need regulating?? I say that they
are the puppy mills that do not already come under USDA
regulations. There is one near me. Their pups are raised in a
barn. They are not regulated. They do not sell to pet shops but
advertise in local papers to the general public. These are the
people who need regulation.
How do you find them??? ANIMAL CONTROL!!!!!!
Those animals have to be vaccinated for Rabies... Animal control
already exists, as does Public Health - in every county in every
state in the US. Public health is responsible for rabies
control, rabies control IS animal control.... When canvassing is
done for rabies, the officer only needs to fill out a simple
form and turn it over to the proper people and you now have a
record of someone breeding a large number of animals.
It doesn't matter who they register with. Some never register.
AKC's registration numbers are just the tip of the iceberg.
There are many registering bodies.
Registration means nothing except the paper it is written
on!!!!!
I have long held that the general public needs a massive
education campaign.
They want a cuddly dog and they go buy what ever they can
afford. REAL BREEDERS educate the public. Puppy mill breeders
don't care who they sell to.. they just sell. They don't get
contracts to spay or neuter.. because it might affect the
sale!!!
Those are the breeders that need regulating.....
Even under the current Paws bill, I could easily fall in the
numbers.....even though I don't breed 7 litters a year, I could
fall into the category by stud fee pups or co-bred litters. So a
numbers game is NOT the answer. Animal control on a local level,
the people who KNOW where the large numbers of dogs/cats are,
that is the answer.
The government of our fine country is already over regulated and
over taxed. Can we not use a system that is already in place,
and support it with funds to hire additional animal control and
fund spay-neuter clinics???
If the "animal rights" people would spend as much time and money
on spaying and neutering as they spend lobbying congress and
advertising, the whole problem would go away!!!!!
I have some better suggestions than AKC has presented.
First: AKC needs to designate which animals they register have
had health checks done. They get a letter grade for current
testing.
Second: any animal shown in the breed ring gets a letter
designation, when it completes a title it gets the title used in
the name as is currently done.
Third: any animal shown in performance events gets a
designation.
Grade A (like milk and restaurants) means the dog has titles and
DNA testing.
Grade B means the dog has been shown, and has DNA testing.
Grade C means the dog has nothing.
Now we have something the public can
understand!!
Not just AKC papers but something that designates the quality of
the animals.
If you were the puppy-buying public, which pup would you buy???
One from grade A and B parents or one from Grade C parents????
I believe the public could grasp this and eventually there would
be no market for grade C animals. Everyone breeding would strive
to have a grade higher than a C and the public would acknowledge
that they prefer to buy from better stock. The end result would
be better dogs, fewer grade C animals, fewer puppy mills.
Just my humble opinion from my side of the fence.
Vickie Haywood
https://www.thedogplace.org/PAWS/Open-Letter_Haywood.asp
#1110
|
PAWS INFORMATION