The laws about no longer term confinement in cages are for breeders, not shelters. ( my concept of the laws I would envision sorry did not specify that)
Seek out a dalmatian rescue if yo u want a dalmatian or find a reputable breeder. The whole point about spay/neuter law and limiting breeding is in the future not to have shelters full of pit mixes (or any/all breeds/mixes to cut the disposable factor way down)
[QUOTE=RackNRoll;8222838]
Fine, but if that’s the minimum standard of care, it must be universally enforced.
What you just envisioned will put rescues and shelters out of business. I can’t recall ever visiting a shelter that wasn’t housing their dogs in cages and small kennels. No-kill shelters keep less adoptable dogs in those conditions for years, while denying adopters who are offering the dog a significant UPGRADE… simply because the adopter’s situation isn’t perfect in every conceivable way. It’s not right.
Any shelter that experiences hold times longer than a month or two should be displaying the same standard of care they require of prospective adopters.[/QUOTE]
We’re discussing standards of care for breeders. Not all animal owners/shelters/etc. Since rescues don’t breed, they wouldn’t be affected by the legislation.
[B]No-kill shelters keep less adoptable dogs in those conditions for years, while denying adopters who are offering the dog a significant UPGRADE… simply because the adopter’s situation isn’t perfect in every conceivable way. It’s not right.
Any shelter that experiences hold times longer than a month or two should be displaying the same standard of care they require of prospective adopters.[/B]
I happen to agree with the above. If a no kill shelter can’t place a dog in a reasonable time frame ( one or two months for example, ) long term keeping of it can not be confined to a cage. Which would turn the shelters without room into kill shelters which sadly is a better option.
But it’s connected…the point of limiting breeding and imposing mandatory spay neuter to all but licensed breeders would be the goal of bringing the need for shelters and rescues way down, with far fewer dogs ending up in them.
Would want the same for cats but cats but the discussion here is dogs…
Because they already play a huge role in the issue. The large commercial operations are USDA inspected kennels. Interstate pet travel is again under the supervision of USDA.
http://caninechronicle.com/breaking-news/breeders-stay-informed-usdaaphis-regulations-faq/
And the current USDA regulations for how the dogs are kept don’t necessarily mesh well with how dogs such as mine are kept where they live in the house as companions with old hardwood floors and not in concrete/sterilizable runs. Puppies are raised in the livingroom.
I live in an area which does NOT have an issue with dog overpopulation. Our adoptable animals in the shelters are imported from other areas. We do not have stray/at large dogs. The folks in other areas who are not bothering with spay/neuter–never mind the lack of valid medical reason for neutering—are unlikely to become responsible, law abiding citizens on the subject with additional regulations. It just creates more paperwork. And FWIW, minimal cost spay/neuter is readily available for cats in my area, far less so for dogs and still, unplanned breedings/litters are rare. You just don’t find a litter of puppies in a ditch.
[QUOTE=Marshfield;8222947]
Because they already play a huge role in the issue. The large commercial operations are USDA inspected kennels. Interstate pet travel is again under the supervision of USDA.
http://caninechronicle.com/breaking-news/breeders-stay-informed-usdaaphis-regulations-faq/
And the current USDA regulations for how the dogs are kept don’t necessarily mesh well with how dogs such as mine are kept where they live in the house as companions with old hardwood floors and not in concrete/sterilizable runs. Puppies are raised in the livingroom.
I live in an area which does NOT have an issue with dog overpopulation. Our adoptable animals in the shelters are imported from other areas. We do not have stray/at large dogs. The folks in other areas who are not bothering with spay/neuter–never mind the lack of valid medical reason for neutering—are unlikely to become responsible, law abiding citizens on the subject with additional regulations. It just creates more paperwork. And FWIW, minimal cost spay/neuter is readily available for cats in my area, far less so for dogs and still, unplanned breedings/litters are rare. You just don’t find a litter of puppies in a ditch.[/QUOTE]
I also think that the harsh winters cull a lot of the feral dogs up north.
A couple weeks of mild frost just doesn’t do much down here.
[QUOTE=Countrywood;8222867]
Seek out a dalmatian rescue if yo u want a dalmatian or find a reputable breeder. The whole point about spay/neuter law and limiting breeding is in the future not to have shelters full of pit mixes (or any/all breeds/mixes to cut the disposable factor way down)[/QUOTE]
You are talking out of both sides of your mouth.
What you propose hits the reputable breeders first.
Alagirl what evidence do you have that laws against VOLUME breeders and puppy mills would affect reputable breeders?
I have not heard one suggestion from you in this entire thread about improving things where are your ideas?
[QUOTE=Alagirl;8223029]
I also think that the harsh winters cull a lot of the feral dogs up north.
A couple weeks of mild frost just doesn’t do much down here.[/QUOTE]
The north east as a whole has much more stringent animal welfare laws, animal control laws, shelter practices and adoption requirements and the attitude towards spay and neuter appears to be different than in some other parts of the country. For example, my county in KY adopts out animals without spay or neuter or even a spay/neuter contract and only a rabies shot, no other vaccinations. That rarely happens in the north east.
Ohio has a relatively new law that addresses high volume breeders (over 9 litters a year).
http://www.daytondailynews.com/news/news/hundreds-of-dog-breeders-uncovered-in-new-puppy-mi/ndPjc/
The law also requires rescues to register and include the addresses of any kennels or fosters. Additionally, if a rescue buys more than 9 dogs a year (because puppy mills were using rescue fronts to sell dogs by passing them off as rescues) they must register as a commercial kennel.
I’ve been involved in animal welfare and investigation of cruelty and neglect for a long time. The difference between the north east and the south is as different as night and day.
[QUOTE=Countrywood;8223042]
Alagirl what evidence do you have that laws against VOLUME breeders and puppy mills would affect reputable breeders?
I have not heard one suggestion from you in this entire thread about improving things where are your ideas?[/QUOTE]
You need to take off your rose colored glasses and read what the laws actually say, vs assuming they mean what you want them to say.
I don’t HAVE to improve the situation.
I do not own a dog, my cats are fixed and I do not intend to breed anything past guppies, which I do not own currently either.
What YOU have to do is make sure that you don’t hurt the good people in the industry while supporting the bad ones, the ones who do it for money.
You want things changed, you have the burden to make sure it’s done right.
Well, due to current regulations, if my friend and mentor were to ship a puppy to me, she’d be in violation of the USDA regulations. I’m likely to be forced to drive 14 hours to Kentucky later this year to bring her a puppy rather than risk violating those same regulations. I know of reputable, hobby breeders who have spent tons of money to have aseptic housing to comply with the the USDA regulations because our home based operations aren’t up to snuff.
If you’re not familiar with it, four intact females could sound like a lot. I’ll be at that number in the fall. But, one will be a juvenile. One will be her mother who may retire after this litter or may have one more—and if retired will have an ovary sparing spay. One will be a young titled bitch, and the fourth is my agility phenom who will remain intact for joint and muscle reasons even if she never has a litter.
Utterly illegal for rescue or shelter animals to be adopted out with reproductive parts still in place in my state. They’re also heartworm tested if old enough and have their distemper vaccines. From the outside looking in, adopting out intact shelter animals seems a good way to keep the shelter busy.
The north east as a whole has much more stringent animal welfare laws, animal control laws, shelter practices and adoption requirements and the attitude towards spay and neuter appears to be different than in some other parts of the country. For example, my county in KY adopts out animals without spay or neuter or even a spay/neuter contract and only a rabies shot, no other vaccinations. That rarely happens in the north east.
Shows that sensible laws have a positive affect! 
[QUOTE=Countrywood;8222859]
The laws about no longer term confinement in cages are for breeders, not shelters. ( my concept of the laws I would envision sorry did not specify that)[/QUOTE]
Wow!
So this is OK for a rescue, but unacceptable for a ‘breeder’.
Is this REALLY about the dogs? Or about stopping breeding. It doesn’t align.
?? If some of you want to float laws about not having shelter animals in cages go for it. I think it is impractical as most shelters don’t have the space nor would a number of rescues.
Shelters are full due to over breeding, cause and effect.
[QUOTE=Countrywood;8223172]
The north east as a whole has much more stringent animal welfare laws, animal control laws, shelter practices and adoption requirements and the attitude towards spay and neuter appears to be different than in some other parts of the country. For example, my county in KY adopts out animals without spay or neuter or even a spay/neuter contract and only a rabies shot, no other vaccinations. That rarely happens in the north east.
Shows that sensible laws have a positive affect! :)[/QUOTE]
There’s more to it than that. The northeast, overall, tends to have better funded government services, is less rural and more educated. There’s a cultural element too. It’s probably an all of an above situation rather than any one thing.
[QUOTE=Countrywood;8223210]
?? If some of you want to float laws about not having shelter animals in cages go for it. I think it is impractical as most shelters don’t have the space nor would a number of rescues.
Shelters are full due to over breeding, cause and effect.[/QUOTE]
Then you are against all breeders.
Just so you are clear on that.
I fail to see how restricting or eliminating dog breeding in the US will stop importations of dogs to keep the rescues full. A classic case of penalizing the law-abiding, and responsible and rewarding the bad.
The real cause is people treating animal purchases as disposable items. I can’t say I’m really surprised, since people walk away from their human families and children (child support) every day.
It is now much more difficult for a responsible breeder to send a pup or adult to a person on the other side of the country (who may have been waiting for a year for that dog); yet rescues can import and transport dogs willy-nilly without oversight.
I see a huge disconnect in dog welfare, and am beginning to see another ‘cause’ than trying to halt (local) overbreeding.
Realize that dogs ARE licensed and there ARE higher fees for un-neutered dogs.
Scofflaws don’t register/license their dogs. Regulations do not hurt them or slow them down in the least.
The analogy is rescue dogs import to stay full? They are taking in overflow from other areas. We all would love to see rescues shut down which would happen if there were not constant stream of disposed of dogs /puppies to fill them .
I fully agree that people disposing of dogs /pets is a huge problem. Where did all the disposable dogs come from? Why are so many around? Would spay/neuter/breeding changes result in lower dog numbers?
[QUOTE=BLBGP;8222105]
Where are you located? My local shelters currently have labs, chihuahuas, pit bulls, fuzzy indeterminate terriers, rat terriers, boxers, corgis, border collies, catahoulas, poodles, cattle dogs, and that’s after only two pages of petfinder browsing. Being in CA, the most common shelter breed is chihuahua, but there are many others available. All can be adopted today, no crazy ‘you must wear blue on Tuesdays’ requirements.[/QUOTE]
Around here (Pittsburgh) we get a lot of pit mixes too. There are other dogs, but not nearly as many. Unfortunately pit mixes aren’t the size I want (I prefer larger dogs because they are easier for me to interact with) so I’m not sure how long it will take me when I start looking properly. I will probably post here to see if anyone knows of good breeders/rescues/shelter dogs a little further afield when I am ready.
(I am about to change meds for my arthritis, so it is a very bad time to add the stress and exercise needs of a young large breed dog from any source.)
[QUOTE=Countrywood;8223357]
I fully agree that people disposing of dogs /pets is a huge problem. Where did all the disposable dogs come from? Why are so many around? Would spay/neuter/breeding changes result in lower dog numbers?[/QUOTE]
This thread has shown that there is a supply and demand when it comes to buying puppies. Sometimes a breeder gets stuck with a whole litter of puppies and decides it’s not worth doing again, but often enough that is not the case because people buy on impulse. Then if things don’t work out, the no longer cute dog is dropped at a shelter or rescue.
It seems like the best thing would be to restrain breeders, but even if every state passed a law that restricted breeding, people would still do it; people would find out about puppies and buy them, and shelters/rescues would still be in business.
Clearly the difference between the northeast and the south show that there is a difference in other things, not just breeding laws. Spay/neuter policies and laws, and education would probably be more effective than regulating breeders.
