Well, the battles are on!  Please do what you can in your state and your community to stop the spread of anti dog and anti breeding legislation.  Please pay close attention to what is going on in Washington as the animal rights groups now feel that they have a direct line to the new administration and are eagerly helping to form a legislative coalition to press the animal rights agenda. 

a small victory :

From the AKC website: http://www.akc.org/news/index.cfm?article_id782

Update: Mandatory Spay/Neuter Language Removed from Florida Bill! [Tuesday, March 24, 2009]

This morning, the Florida House Agriculture and Natural Resources Policy Committee adopted a “strike-all” amendment to House Bill 451, which would have required the mandatory spay/neuter of all dogs four months of age with little exception. The Florida Association of Kennel Clubs reports that the amendment, offered by HB 451’s sponsor, Representative Scott Randolph, has removed all mandatory spay/neuter language, and instead provides local government officials the option of using a $5 surcharge currently added to animal control citations to help pay for low-cost spay/neuter programs.The American Kennel Club commends the Florida Association of Kennel Clubs and the many concerned Florida residents who took action in opposition to the original version of HB 451. Their tireless efforts have ensured that the rights and liberties of responsible dog breeders and owners in Florida will continue to be honored. The American Kennel Club also thanks Representative Randolph for listening to the grave concerns of the AKC and the thousands of Floridians who expressed their strong opposition to mandatory spay/neuter. The AKC Government Relations Department is pleased to have assisted the Florida Association of Kennel Clubs by issuing several legislative alerts with contact information and sample letters; e-mailing thousands of AKC club members, officers, delegates, judges, and legislative liaisons; reporting developments to tens of thousands of alert recipients; and contacting legislators with anti-MSN policy arguments.

 

. . . And now the horrors of the proposed Texas bills.  Please send the following to anyone you know who can help defeat this legislation in Texas.  How has the tail began wagging the dog in the great state of Texas???

Forwarded with permission.

Texans need to pay attention here, and PLEASE send on to all persons, organizations, and clubs in Texas who might help in fighting these bills!

Around 15 dog / pet-related bills have been filed this legislative session. Zandra Anderson is an attorney who has worked with dog folks in Dallas and other locations, and who was a leader in the fight last legislative session. She is currently working on briefs against several of the proposed bills and is planning to testify in opposition to the bills. The bills currently in focus follow.

Mandatory Spay Neuter–HB 4277 / SB 1845 (all dogs and cats over 6 mos. old must be altered unless they are showed in competition or used for breeding;  intact permit of $300 per animal) The only people who are targeted by this law are those people who own and contain their dogs. Stray, un-owned dogs (and cats) that breed indiscriminately are fair game for local animal control to impound if they have at large laws. If there is a statewide edict that all dogs and cats have to be sterilized and the breeder bill will legislate responsible breeding to extinction, then where are we supposed to get our next pets? Perhaps we can start importing them even in greater numbers from outside the state.There are many valid reasons people have intact animals. In addition to show dogs, genetics is the key component in hunting dogs. Our state is known for hunting so this law adversely affects one of the state’s most popular sports.Working dogs, tracking dogs, guard dogs, search and rescue dogs are often kept intact to be able to continue a line of elite dogs in these various fields.

A statewide mandatory spay neuter law is misplaced. Any such laws should be entertained on a local level. What state agency will police whether or not our animals are altered? There are no state animal control officers, so there is no agency to enforce this law. This is a decision that should be left up to local governments. It would be an added expense to the state that is not discussed in any fiscal note and would be an astronomical expense considering that over 60% of Americans own a cat or a dog (American Pet Products Manufacturer’s Association–APPMA).·

Voluntary spay neuter initiatives are effective and over the past twenty-five years, altering pets has been on a significant rise. Currently, 75% of owned dogs and 87% of owned cats are altered (APPMA).Despite what humane organizations publicize about pet overpopulation when they are trying to drive donations, euthanasia has decreased over the last twenty-five years regardless that pet ownership has soared. The Tufts Center for Animals and Public Policy collected data indicating that in 1973 there were 65 million cats and dogs in the U.S. and that 13 million, or 20%, were euthanized. The Humane Society of the U.S. estimates that 3-4 million dogs and cats are euthanized in the country currently. As of last year, there were 163.1 million cats and dogs in our country (APPMA). Therefore, approximately 1.8% – 2.4% of cats and dogs are euthanized last year. Euthanasia rates are on the steady decline, so voluntary spay neuter initiatives are working and will continue to work particularly if low cost/no cost spay neuter is available.

More animals will die in shelters because many releasing agencies cannot afford to spay and neuter the animals they release.This bill will adversely affect animal control facilities being able to release intact dogs to rescue organizations despite the rescues willingness to alter the animals under their programs. The bill clearly states that the releasing agency cannot release an animal for adoption unless they are fixed, so a strict interpretation would not allow them to release intact animals to rescue. This will be devastating for the animals and shelters alike.

Only 10% of Americans obtain their pets from humane organizations or shelters (APPMA). Euthanasia rates in our state could be diminished if more people who wanted a pet could be convinced to get one from their local shelter or humane organization.No one wants to see even one healthy animal needlessly put down, but this bill will increase euthanasia rates. In every city that has tried mandatory spay neuter, the euthanasia rates have increased. Enforcement of mandatory spay neuter laws in cities that have them are usually prejudicially aimed at citizens who can least afford to fight back. Instead of unfairly going after economically disadvantaged citizens, why not offer them low cost or no cost spay neuter? Every time a spay neuter mobile unit goes into these areas, they are filled to capacity of people wanting to get their animals altered. People could use this help especially during these challenging economic times.

There is absolutely no reason the government should make it their business what an animal owner chooses to do with an owner’s animals. My dog, my choice. The government needs to quit micromanaging the lives of its citizens and their animals.

Breeder Bill–HB 3180/ SB 1910 (10 or less intact breeding females is a hobby breeder, 11 or more is a commercial breeder; includes hobby breeder as a dealer; harsh laws for dealers regarding the sale of puppies; has a lemon law for puppies.

This bill is convoluted to say the least. It is so complex that is not really enforceable. This bill seeks to allow the Department the right to have a vet, animal control or a humane society agent do the inspections of the breeder facilities. Animal control knows nothing about breeding. Humane societies know nothing about breeding. Putting people in charge of inspections who have no training or knowledge in breeding can be very problematic, and be ripe for abuse.

Humane societies should not be used by the government for these inspections. They are not governmental agencies and for the government to abdicate responsibility to some humane organization is giving way too much power to these groups. Many humane organizations have philosophies that are opposed to breeding, so then to allow them to do inspections of breeding facilities is unfair and ripe for abuse. To allow humane organizations to inspect the facilities creates the same conflict as exists in our cruelty seizures. The very humane organizations who are doing the investigating are the ones who will get the animals if they are seized from the breeder. This is like the wolves guarding the sheep and is fertile for abuse. Many times they are the same humane organizations who fight for mandatory spay neuter laws and who warn against buying from breeders. These are not the people you want investigating breeders who they are typically philosophically opposed to from the outset. The cruel conditions of a puppy mill cannot be condoned, but this bill is not really a puppy mill bill as touted. This bill affects all commercial breeders including the ones who do a good job (not puppy mills), and affects the hobby breeders regarding their sale of animals. Hobby breeders do not have their facility inspected per this bill, but they will have their sales scrutinized.·

Hobby breeders (those with ten or less intact females capable of breeding) are not the target of all the laws controlling a commercial breeder’s “facility.” However, they are included in the definition of a dealer which includes a person who is required to collect sales tax for sale of a puppy or kitten to the public.

There are onerous conditions placed on dealers under Subchapter G which addresses the retail sale of dogs or cats. This section applies to dealers which includes the hobby breeder. There is a requirement that dealers provide detailed disclosures about the animal being sold, a retention requirement of records pertaining to the animal, a requirement to deliver registration documents to purchaser, and requires a veterinarian examine the animal prior to sale. Dealers are subject to what are initially lemon laws for the sale of puppies and kittens. They have to essentially guarantee that the animal is free of genetic or hereditary problems, and is free from any health problems. These requirements are very complex and far reaching.

Dangerous Dog Bill–HB 1982 (makes your dog dangerous if he barks in your own yard and anyone says they are in fear; makes owners dogs 40# and more keep them in secure enclosures meant for Dangerous Dogs, no off lead)

Pit Bull Handling Bill– HB 925 (makes it illegal for anyone 15 or younger to handle or care for an APBT (American Pit Bull Terrier), AmStaff, Staffie Bull or any pit bull type dog, including mixes)

HB 2001 Tethering (would not allow your dog to be in your yard unless attended; no tethering allowed no matter how done)