Shame on Dr. Sprigg

Dr. Spriggs's editorial asserting that current law is stronger than those provisions that would be required by Proposition B is just plain wrong and Dr. Sprigg knows what she is saying is incorrect. Proposition B does not replace the current law. It only adds to the current law and it does dramatically improve standards of care.

I debated Dr. Sprigg last week at Truman State University and afterwards she admitted that she had gotten it wrong in reference to Prop B replacing current law as compared to adding to it. How she can a few days later repeat the same false information is astonishing.

Her assertion that current law prohibits confinement is blatantly incorrect. Current law does indeed allow dogs to be confined in wire floor cages for their entire existence. The law only requires the dogs to be given six inches of room on either side of the cage. For example, a beagle can be legally confined to a cage the size of a dishwasher for its entire life at a commercial breeding establishment. The only exception is for dogs housed alone and then there still is no requirement for the dog to have access to an exercise area, only a "promise" from the breeders that they will exercise the dog.

Equally outrageous is her assertion that the Missouri Department of Agriculture will not have authority to enforce Proposition B. In fact, the enforcment mechanism does not change at all. Prop B is simply amending current standards of care and its provisions will be enforced by the Department of Agriculture.

The most important element of Prop B is it's requirement for an annual physical exam and prompt veterinary care for breeding dogs that are ill or injured. For a veterinarian to dismiss such an important provision of Proposition B is

truly shocking.

Comments