[SeMissourian.com] Fair ~ 37°F  
River stage: 22.63 ft. Rising
Saturday, Mar. 28, 2015

Why Proposition B Should Stay on the Books

The following story has been submitted by a user of semissourian.com. To submit your own story to the site, click here.
Sunday, January 9, 2011

I have reviewed both the old bill and the new one. The new one is worded clearly and concisely and the old one is fragmented. If people are truly interested in reality and not the exaggerated propaganda from people who just do not want regulation on these kennels that are complaining please read the Bills. You can google them up.

We just don't need all these kennel's when the bottom line to them is just the bottom line.

If they truly had Christian Ethics, they would find another way to make money than to use animals to overbreed till they die.

I know this as a hobby breeder who treats my dogs like children and not slaves to my greed.

Note: The nature of the Internet makes it impractical for our staff to review every comment. If you feel that a comment is offensive, please Login or Create an account first, and then you will be able to flag a comment as objectionable. Please also note that those who post comments on semissourian.com may do so using a screen name, which may or may not reflect a website user's actual name. Readers should be careful not to assign comments to real people who may have names similar to screen names. Refrain from obscenity in your comments, and to keep discussions civil, don't say anything in a way your grandmother would be ashamed to read.

Thank you for your writing, Leslie.

Your point is very good: people can access the bill text directly and see for themselves the truth.

-- Posted by shelleyp on Sun, Jan 9, 2011, at 2:04 PM

Sorry, you lost me at "Christian Ethics". Whice ones are you referning to?

"It cannot be ignored that Christianity offers a convenient divine mandate for hatred and violent acts against a wide range of people in our diverse country. Christians are going to have to seriously rethink and revamp their faith if they are going to join in building a prosperous, pluralistic America of the future."


-- Posted by timexx on Sun, Jan 9, 2011, at 7:13 PM

Let us be clear: these are not separate bills; Prop B is an AMENDMENT to the existing ACFA. It offers no means of enforcement nor a plan to address the unlicensed breeders in this state despite the fact that the HSUS touted it as the Puppy Mill Bill. I really would like to know how it will further enforce the current law beyond what MDA is able to now do and how it will find, address, and deal with the unlicensed and backyard breeders. I truly want to know.

"Snarky?" I am looking for a civilized discussion, not a mud slinging one, please. Factual discourse is needed to save animals.

-- Posted by silverwalk on Sun, Jan 9, 2011, at 7:40 PM

Actually Christianity and The Bible are about love, not hate. Many people may twist the words of The Bible and Christian priciples to back up terrible acts, but Christians are not the only ones who do that. Most of us (Christians) are just trying to do the best we can to exist peacefully, similar to the athiest, or any other religion.

-- Posted by alicat021 on Sun, Jan 9, 2011, at 8:28 PM

Silverwalk, you answered your own question:

"Let us be clear: these are not separate bills; Prop B is an AMENDMENT to the existing ACFA."

Funding for enforcement is part of the regulations that form the mandate for ACFA. And there is no differentiation between license and unlicensed breeders, but ACFA also has addition regulations regarding unlicensed breeders.

Proposition B did not need to repeat what was already part of law.

-- Posted by shelleyp on Sun, Jan 9, 2011, at 8:38 PM

Excuse me, amendment. I was very angry when I read this before church. After the assasination attempt yesterday and doing Handel's Messiah at Trinity Lutheran later on this afternoon, I just reacted. If you are an atheist. fine, this does not concern you, I was one myself for 30 years. I just hate it when people use the term "Christian" innapropriately.

The big change in the amendment was you couldn't have over 50 dogs. Thank God. I studied this very hard last summer because of the e mail I kept getting from that kennel group.

The new amendment cleaned up the old messy one. Lets be clear. It was messy.


-- Posted by happypappies on Sun, Jan 9, 2011, at 10:49 PM

If funding is part of ACFA and not affected by Prop B, then why, as part of the Prop B listing on the ballot, would Prop B cost the taxpayers' more than $500,000 to put into place? Just asking....

-- Posted by silverwalk on Mon, Jan 10, 2011, at 12:59 PM

Because the Department of Agriculture needs additional inspectors, but it needs additional inspectors regardless of what happens with Proposition B.

However, the Department of Agriculture must take some responsibility for this state, since (according to state audit) it has not done an effective job of insuring the appropriate fees are paid by licensed breeders.

Regardless, Proposition B does not have a mandate to reform the Department of Agriculture, nor the current licensing fee structure. It is up to the Department of Agriculture to review its fee structure and do what is necessary to ensure enough inspectors.

Whatever it does, Proposition B does not add additional work for the inspectors. If anything, having fewer than 50 dogs per breeder should decrease the demand on inspector time.

Some communities (1 or 2, I can't remember) also thought they may have increased costs for enforcement, but at the same time, some communities also felt they may save money in the long run by there being fewer puppy mills, and less demand on shelters.

-- Posted by shelleyp on Tue, Jan 11, 2011, at 10:30 AM

One means for more funding starting this year is a fee/tax to rescues/shelters of $100 plus $1 for each dog going through their rescue alive. What dismays me about this new tax is only live dogs are taxed; not those who are killed...so I could kill all my adoptable dogs (which I won't) but will be taxed on those I save. This is a sad message. But yes, here is one way funding is being acquired. Shelters/rescues did not previously have any fees/taxes.

-- Posted by silverwalk on Tue, Jan 11, 2011, at 11:02 AM

Explain to me why the new law changes the required number of feedings per day from 2 to 1?

Explain to me how this new law is going to be enforced when the existing laws were not fully enforced?

Explain to me how 51 dogs is a Puppy Mill and 50 dogs is not?

-- Posted by bebo on Tue, Jan 11, 2011, at 6:06 PM

@littleblackdogs - you answered the last question bebo had but not the first two - what are your thoughts on those questions? Thanks for civil discourse.

-- Posted by silverwalk on Thu, Jan 13, 2011, at 1:55 PM

Just as an update, I got a note from that man at hurd kennels because they never stop sending me things. He said he was robbed in London and would all of us please send him money. He only needed 3000.00. I don't believe that. Do you? In case you don't already know, hurdkennels@aol.com was the group against the amendment.

-- Posted by happypappies on Fri, Jan 14, 2011, at 4:37 PM

Respond to this story

Posting a comment requires free registration. If you already have an account on seMissourian.com or semoball.com, enter your username and password below. Otherwise, click here to register.


Password:  (Forgot your password?)

Your comments:
Please be respectful of others and try to stay on topic.

Related subjects