advertisement

LETTER: Rose Nolen should consider who is behind Proposition B

Thursday, October 28, 2010 | 2:20 p.m. CDT

COLUMBIA — I take offense at many statements that Ms. Rose Nolen made in her article, "ROSE NOLEN: Respecting animals, nature important to previous Missouri farmers - Columbia Missourian."

First of all, Ms. Nolen, just because a person dresses in a suit or flies in a jet, does that make them any less of a good farmer or advocate for animals?

I understand that you care deeply about values that were established by people (farmers) you grew up around. I know a lot of good farmers who wear suits, fly commercially — just like you probably do — and who see the faces of their animals every day.

Prop. B is being brought to our state by the Humane Society of the United States. They are not who they say they are, and they have a lot of hidden agendas. They are NOT anything like your local Human Society and, in fact, many times burden your local Human Society with caring for dogs that they supposedly rescue, at the expense of your state.

I beg you, please check out thoroughly the people who are bringing this law to your state, ... and if you would like to meet farmers, then give me a call, and I'll get you an appointment to visit farms in Missouri or Illinois or many other states if you would like.

Pam Fretwell lives in Quincy, Ill.


Like what you see here? Become a member.


Show Me the Errors (What's this?)

Report corrections or additions here. Leave comments below here.

You must be logged in to participate in the Show Me the Errors contest.


Comments

Marina Shane October 28, 2010 | 8:05 p.m.

Pam... Prop B is actually brought to us by 192,000 REGISTERED MISSOURI VOTERS who cared enough to sign the petition to put Prop B on the Ballot! (As a signature gatherer & Notary for the campaign I can personally attest to that!)
.
Why would every Humane organization in Missouri endorse & support Prop B? Because they are the ones who have to deal with the aftermath of sick, matted dogs that have lived their lives in filth. The Commercial Dog breeding industry has 1 year to comply & come up to standards with Prop B. Shelters & rescues are already preparing to accomodate the influx of dogs they will receive when Prop B passes. Looking to the future, the passage of Prop B will mean less rescues, less cruelty, less euthanazia from overbreeding & abandoned breeding dogs from puppy mills.
.
There is a reason why Missouri is known as the "puppy mill capitol" of the United States. It is because our laws are the WEAKEST in the nation! We have 3 times more licensed commercial dog breeders than any other state. With weak laws we attract the cess pool of the dog breeders.
.
As a Missourian, I'm sick of living in the "Puppy Mill Capital of the US". Missouri needs to add to & clear up our current legislation regarding dog breeding. Proposition B will help do that. It will add to the current ACFA (Animal Care Facilities Act) & make the current laws clearer & easier to enforce.
.
I honestly believe that anyone who understands the horrific impact PUPPY MILLS have in the state of Missouri can only come to one conclusion . Please join me in voting YES on Prop B this November.
.
Vote Yes! Prop B
Prevent Puppy Mill Cruelty!

(Report Comment)
Michelle Cascio October 28, 2010 | 8:36 p.m.

Prop B is supported by more than 100 Missouri veterinarians and veterinary clinics; more than 100 animal welfare charities and organizations, including the Humane Society of Missouri, the Missouri Alliance for Animal Legislation, Central Missouri Humane Society, Humane Society of Southwest Missouri, Wayside Waifs, the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA) and The Humane Society of the United States (HSUS); prominent Missouri citizens such as Tony LaRussa and Linda Bond; as well as responsible dog breeders, religious leaders, and Missouri businesses. Polling shows that 89% of MO voters support the protections outlined in Prop B.

(Report Comment)
Anne Hogan October 28, 2010 | 8:56 p.m.

As much as some people want to make this issue about the HSUS and just about everything under the sun, the fact is that it is about puppy mills. Nothing more, nothing less. Fifteen states recently passed strong laws cracking down on abusive puppy mills, including major agricultural states, giving dogs basic humane standards of care such as food, water, veterinary care, exercise and shelter.
It is a sad reality, but Missouri is the largest puppy mill state, and is lagging behind on dog protection - that's why Prop B is needed.

Read the act for yourself at yesonpropb.com, where you will also be able to find answers to common questions, and vote YES on Prop B.

(Report Comment)
Sarah Barnett October 28, 2010 | 8:56 p.m.

Pam I would like to ask - just because an organization addresses animal cruelty at a national level, does that mean they can't possibly help animals at a local level?

It is an unfortunate fact that Missouri is a magnet for bad operators because of confusing and vague, complicated regulations. This doesn't mean that there are not responsible breeders in Missouri, in fact you can see some of them here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uML8SFA9Z...

But it means that Missouri needs to step it up, and provide Missouri law enforcement officials with new tools to crack down on puppy mill cruelty by voting YES on Prop B. Read the language for yourself, at www.yesonpropb.com/about/read-act

(Report Comment)
jim foster October 28, 2010 | 9:19 p.m.

Michelle, Why was our local pastor Thad Carter listed on the Yes on Prop B website? He along with several Methodist minister unknowingly had their names listed. How exactly do you account for this? He found out yesterday and called those responsible. Go to yahoo and type in Thad Carter proposition B.
When I do it show his name as an endorser and it lists him under Lowman Chapel Methodist Church which is just up the road from my home. Busted Michelle!!!! Just like what happened to me in the last debate with Barbara Schmitz. Did you happen to catch what happened in the end of that one?

Here it is: wonder if HSUS has good insurance?

http://www.facebook.com/l.php?u=http%3A%...

(Report Comment)
Ray Shapiro October 28, 2010 | 9:20 p.m.

Be sure to check out:

Number 16. in the "Fliers and Hand Outs" section,
Why Vote NO!

It has just been added to the list of hand outs.
10-26-2010

http://www.mofed.org/Hand-outs-Printable...

(Report Comment)
jim foster October 28, 2010 | 9:25 p.m.

Sarah, what about bad rescues, no kill shelters and catteries? Its okay to do a bad job as long as it is non-profit? How does this work? 150 dogs in a no-kill in K.C. Not enough volunteers. Shelter is in sad condition. 3 dogs were the only ones that got to get out for a walk to stretch and relieve themselves in a 7 day period? Cruel?
A colleague of mine started calling the vets and clinics on that so-called support website. What do you think she found out? Hmmmm how did our name get on there?

(Report Comment)
Ray Shapiro October 28, 2010 | 9:41 p.m.

It's not about puppies:
http://www.columbiamissourian.com/storie...
And remember, when they control the food, they will control the people.

(Report Comment)
Jessica Bryand October 28, 2010 | 11:18 p.m.

So HSUS will be moving dogs from one cage to another and who will pay for their food, shelter, care, and the cost to seize the dogs?

"Anne-ection 5(3) - "where needed, humane euthanasia by a licensed veterinarian using lawful techniques deemed "Acceptable" by the American Veterinary Medical Association." - that means no illegal dumping." LOLOLOLOLOL!!!!!!!
This must be more "common sense" regs. So like I asked before, how does that make Hunte at fault of state regs, which in no way apply to Hunte, as Hunte has veternarians on staff? So then why are you accusing HUNTE?" Shouldn't you be accusing the DNR??"disposeof dead animals within 24
hours or as soon as it is safe to do so. Use the following methods, in order
of most preferable: processing at a rendering plant, on-site composting as
recommended by University of Missouri Extension, disposal in a sanitary
landfill, incineration in a UM service-designed agricultural incinerator or a statepermitted
commercial incinerator, or on-site burial following state law’s standard
loading limitations." See how well "ommon sense"regs work!!! So the AMVA has a state law in Missouri that regulates disposal of deceased animals???

(Report Comment)
Marina Shane October 28, 2010 | 11:29 p.m.

See what a puppy mill looks like:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=60LiJE-Cm...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dhbp7Jz0l...
.
According to the Department of Agriculture, A Blue Ribbon Kennel has exceeded industry standardswhen it comes to the care & welfare of animals. They are held to a higher standard than any other kennel in Missouri.
See what a Blue Ribbon Kennel looks like:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qdI2U6dgA...
A picture says a thousands words.
.
This is why Missouri needs better commercial dog breeding laws. Our weak laws are the reason that Missouri is the puppy mill capitol of the United States. Please join me in voting YES on Prop B!
.
More info about Missouri Puppy Mills & Animal welfare Law in Missouri can be found at: http://www.maal.org/Puppy-Mills.asp
.
Join the Campaign at: www.yesonpropb.com
.

.
November 2, 2010
YOU CAN HELP STOP THE CRUELTY!
VOTE YES on PROP B!

(Report Comment)
Ray Shapiro October 29, 2010 | 12:48 a.m.

Worth repeating:
("Amanda Rudgar October 10, 2010 | 1:40 a.m.
Quality Breeding Is A Profession To Be Respected

Most animal rights members want to put an end to dog breeding. At the very least they believe dog breeding should only be done as a free service provided by hobby breeders to an elite few.

Several have said they do not believe there should be any dog breeding what-so-ever. None. That anyone wanting a dog should go to the pound or find a stray mongrel.

In any field we go to experts for advice and product, and those experts in turn are paid for the service and product they produce and provide for our purchase. Professional breeders are asking for nothing less. Hobby breeders could never meet the demand for quality purebred dogs. Hobby breeders have less experience. Hobby breeders usually have jobs outside the home therefore cannot possibly house train a litter of puppies. Not to worry though, Proposition B would put an end to raising a litter of puppies in one's home.

Experienced professional breeders of purebred dogs offer us the dogs lineage, medical history, breed character, and someone to fall back on should we need advice through the years. Some even offer training advice.

The obvious push is for dog lovers to own only mongrels, it must be, otherwise, why do animal rights groups try to force the public to select a rejected dog over one with specifically bred purpose? What sense does this make? Temperament begins with good genetics. Nervous, high strung, skittish, and aggressive dogs often have a genetic predisposition to behave that way, which is how many end up in shelters. Only a few are taken due to job loss, death of owner, etc. The rest are there because of irresponsible owners who acquired their dog on a whim and loved it only until the novelty wore off. Experienced professional breeders screen potential buyers to avoid this.")
Vote No on Proposition B.

(Report Comment)
Jessica Bryand October 29, 2010 | 3:13 a.m.

http://dogpostdaily.com/prop-b-puts-rest...

Keep exaggerating HSUS posters!!!!

(Report Comment)
Terry Ward October 29, 2010 | 6:50 a.m.

The closer the election, the more they rant about the HSUS and the less they address the real issue.

(Report Comment)
Mark Foecking October 29, 2010 | 7:19 a.m.

Anne Hogan wrote:

"As much as some people want to make this issue about the HSUS and just about everything under the sun, the fact is that it is about puppy mills."

Could you post approximately how much this issue has brought HSUS in donations? I notice on the HSUS webpage dealing with this that there is a donartion link. Might be interesting to compare with their reported outlays.

Terry Ward wrote:

"the more they rant about the HSUS and the less they address the real issue."

The real issue, as I've said all along, is enforcement. Prop B can provide another mechanism for that. However, prop B goes way further, and instead of simply shutting down bad breeders, will make it so expensive and unprofitable to breed that few breeders will be left, good or bad.

It punishes the good for the sins of the bad. And it is being pushed here by either paid employees of HSUS, extreme dog lovers with no knowledge of institutional animal care, or people that want revenge on the industry for their perceived, unproven sins. Once again, no one has shown that the actions of the bad breeders are in any way typical of Missouri breeders as a whole. Prop B supporters assume that they are.

Sarah Barnett wrote:

"because of confusing and vague, complicated regulations."

They're not vague and confusing so much as they are flexible. Leaving care details to be worked out between the breeder and the attending vet gives them the ability to adapt caging, exercise, feeding and grooming requirements to the particular location and the breeds being bred. Like several vets have said here and there, dog breeding is not a one-size-fits-all operation. Prop B takes away a lot of the flexibility, and adds a lot of often unnecessary cost.

DK

(Report Comment)
Marina Shane October 29, 2010 | 8:47 a.m.

See what a puppy mill looks like:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=60LiJE-Cm......
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dhbp7Jz0l......
.
According to the Department of Agriculture, A Blue Ribbon Kennel has exceeded industry standardswhen it comes to the care & welfare of animals. They are held to a higher standard than any other kennel in Missouri.
See what a Blue Ribbon Kennel looks like:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qdI2U6dgA......
A picture says a thousands words.
.
This is why Missouri needs better commercial dog breeding laws. Our weak laws are the reason that Missouri is the puppy mill capitol of the United States. Please join me in voting YES on Prop B!
.
More info about Missouri Puppy Mills & Animal welfare Law in Missouri can be found at: http://www.maal.org/Puppy-Mills.asp
.
Join the Campaign at: www.yesonpropb.com
.

.
November 2, 2010
YOU CAN HELP STOP THE CRUELTY!
VOTE YES on PROP B!

(Report Comment)
Michelle Cascio October 29, 2010 | 11:02 a.m.

Jessica,

You wrote-
So HSUS will be moving dogs from one cage to another and who will pay for their food, shelter, care, and the cost to seize the dogs?

I'm not sure exactly what you mean. Do you mean when we assist local law enforcement with the seizure of puppy mill dogs, do we put them in cages? Well, we set-up an emergency shelter for 3-4 days so the dogs can be triaged before they are transported to our placement partners for continued rehab and to find their forever homes. Trust me, I've been on the ground for quite a few seizures and the clean crates lined with pee pads and tons of volunteers waiting to take care of them is a far cry from the filthy conditions we remove them from. Last year, a puppy mill survivor had to be cut out of the stacked wire cage he had lived in his entire life because he had matted to the cage. After we shaved off his extensively matted coat- we discovered he was a shih tzu- you couldn't tell what breed he was he was so matted. How does that happen? A dog has such little room to move and stretch that his matted coat starts to wrap around the wire? Are you trying to compare that misery to the care the dogs receive after they are rescued?

For these rescues, we often receive donated food and crates from Petsmart Charities. United Animal Nations (UAN) may send their EARS volunteers to help provide animal care in the temporary setting. We may deploy our NDARTS- certified disaster animal responders. Local veterinarians that really care about animals volunteer hours and hours to exam and treat each dog. We deploy our staff and equipment for as long as it takes- HSUS pays for this- salaries, travel, supplies. We bring these resources to local areas that cannot provide this type of response when they discover they have cruel conditions in a puppy mill in their jurisdiction. We support local law enforcement.

Each and every dog is examined, treated for existing conditions, given vaccinations, and treated for internal and external parasites (which are typically rampant in puppy mills). Those with severe injuries or genetic conditions are sent to placement partners that we work with and support financially if neccessary. HSUS pays for this. I am grateful everyday for the generousity of our supporters. All 11 million of them. They make it all possible.

(Report Comment)
Sarah Barnett October 29, 2010 | 11:28 a.m.

Mark, the current problem is that, for example, if someone calls the police and complains that the local puppy mill is violating the ACFA, the law enforcement officer would have a difficult time finding evidence that the dogs are not housed according to the complex math formula for cages used by MDA. If the officer remains suspicious, he will likely just file a complaint with MDA and let them take over because of the practical realities of the situation.

If the MDA investigates, the agency will then decide whether to handle the situation internally through administrative means or to have the local prosecutor get involved in filing misdemeanor charges. So while it is theoretically possible for local law enforcement to act on their own, that it is highly unlikely under the current legal scheme.

That is where Prob B makes a neccessary improvement on the current process. It doesn't change any of the enforcement infrastructure, but it does provide new, clear cut criminal prohibitions, like the cap on total breeding dogs, the cage size requirements, and the requirement that there be constant access to outdoor space.

I have faith in Missourians ability to read the measure for themselves, and see that this is neccessary to help stop the cruelty in puppy mills in Missouri. Visit www.yesonpropb.com/about/read-act to learn more

(Report Comment)
Jessica Bryand October 29, 2010 | 11:47 a.m.

Does this require extra law enforcement? Who pays them? So they are in crates until they are found a home? What gives law enforcement authority to access peoples property without a search warrant? In Proposition B, please show me where this Proposition allows HSUS to be any part of enforcement and where it requires cleaning of urine and feces?

(Report Comment)
Michelle Cascio October 29, 2010 | 12:03 p.m.

It only requires the time a sheriff or deputy might already spend to confront cruelty in their jurisdictions. When they call and request our assistance because they don't have the resources to do it- then we deploy and there is zero expense to the community. Many older puppy mill survivors end up in foster care programs because they need additional recovery time before they are made available for adoption by local groups. Puppies and very young dogs may have less issues and are made available for adoption much sooner. The way they are housed depends on the foster home, rescue group, or shelter housing.

Again- are you trying to imply that housing rescued dogs in clean crates with pee pads and consistant proper animal care until they are adopted into loving homes is a fate worse than living in filth churning out puppies for profit and quantity?

(Report Comment)
Jessica Bryand October 29, 2010 | 12:24 p.m.

Well do you have rules and regulations on what rescue groups are to follow? "zero expense to the community" so our tax dollars are not paying the salary of these law enforcement officers to investigate or enforce these new regulations? Who is going to reimburse the county the wages and transportation costs spent on seizures? And again please show me in the Proposition where the requirements are for the cleaning of urine and feces?

(Report Comment)
Jessica Bryand October 29, 2010 | 12:33 p.m.

Another question I still have yet to receive an answer on,AMVA has a state law in Missouri that regulates disposal of deceased animals??? Because that is the way I read Anne's post. And unfortunately, the law states you can dispose in a landfill, correct? So with Hunte having on staff Vets, then this should be a DNR issue and Hunte should not be attacked correct?"

(Report Comment)
Shelley Powers October 29, 2010 | 1:23 p.m.

Jessica Brand, to see how existing rescues work, you only need check the Missouri news for the last year.

Here's a story about a facility that had its dogs removed this year:

http://www.lakenewsonline.com/news/x1350...

The dogs were seized because there was immediate concern about their welfare, but no charges were filed. Why? For one, existing cruelty and neglect charges are difficult to prosecute. From the standpoint of commercial breeding laws, the only criminal act the breeder could have been charged with is if she was still selling the dogs without the MDA license. Now if she was selling the dogs surreptitiously through the Internet, and not declaring her sales to the state, it would be difficult, if not impossible, to actually catch her in this act so she could be charged.

Even when the USDA acted this time, they didn't in the previous two years, when similar violations had occurred. Like the existing laws with the Missouri Department of Agriculture, the legal loopholes for the USDA are wide enough to drive a semi through--beginning with the fact that you have to repeat the same violation for three inspections in a row to lose a license.

Just to lose a license.

Luckily the inspectors received new training this last spring, which I think led to this seizure.

Now, with Proposition B, the Sheriff could have charged the owner of the puppy mill with a class C misdemeanor and the prosecutor would have had a clear, and uncontestable criminal charge to pursue. It may not seem like much, but it is something. More importantly, it makes a stronger case for organizations like the Humane Society of Missouri to remove these dogs permanently and find them a good home.

And luckily, these dogs did end up with a second chance:

http://www.lakenewsonline.com/news/x2103...

Cost? The police already have to respond to animal complaints. As the fiscal note stated, there may be some additional work for the police or public defenders, but most of these departments didn't see any appreciable costs associated with the new bill.

We have most of the puppy mills in the country, but we don't have tens of thousands of mills in this state (thank goodness). Proposition B is not going to overwhelm the police or courts. If anything, it could simplify prosecution of true violators, as well as cause voluntary closures of some of the worst breeders.

(Report Comment)
Shelley Powers October 29, 2010 | 1:27 p.m.

Jessica your question about disposing of dogs and Hunte--is this related to Proposition B in any way? I'm having a hard time figuring out what you're asking.

Maybe Michelle will have better luck.

(Report Comment)
Michelle Cascio October 29, 2010 | 1:42 p.m.

Before I comment, let me see if I understand clearly...

I think Jessica is trying to excuse Hunte's activities exposed in the illegal dead dog report by alleging that Hunte should be forgiven because they have vets on the premises who should have known better because of the AVMA.

You say the- "AVMA has a state law in Missouri". But the AVMA is not a regulatory agency and while they can make recommendations to the veterinary profession and support legistlative efforts- they cannot on their own enact laws.

Please clarify.

(Report Comment)
Jessica Bryand October 29, 2010 | 1:58 p.m.

"Anne-section 5(3) - "where needed, humane euthanasia by a licensed veterinarian using lawful techniques deemed "Acceptable" by the American Veterinary Medical Association." - that means no illegal dumping."

Her words not mine, so please clarifiy how this means no illegal dumping? My question is Why Mrs. Schmitz is targeting Hunte and Not DNR? Or why she is using taxpayer money for an investigation when it looks like no one is "dumping" out of regulations?

(Report Comment)
Anne Hogan October 29, 2010 | 2:01 p.m.

I think Jessica's confusion is coming from the semantics of the line in Section 5 regarding euthanasia "using lawful techniques deemed "Acceptable" by the American Veterinary Medical Association".

This line does not mean that the AVMA has created any laws, it means that the methods of euthanasia must be both lawful and in accordance with AVMA guidelines.

Is that what you were asking?

(Report Comment)
Jessica Bryand October 29, 2010 | 2:40 p.m.

So Shelley, in your post about the dog removal, the owner was never charged or held acountable?

Current law: class A misdemeanor

Proposition B applies only to breeders:C misdemeanor,unless the defendant has
previously pled guilty to or been found guilty of a
violation of this section, in which case each such
violation is a class A misdemeanor.

So why is prop b allowing possible repeat offenders? And current law applies to Operation of an animal shelter, boarding kennel, commercial kennel, contract kennel,
pet shop, pound or dog pound, or activity as a
commercial breeder, dealer, intermediate
handler or exhibitor (other than a limited
show or exhibit) without a valid license is a
class A misdemeanor (up to 1 year and $1,000)?

(Report Comment)
Jessica Bryand October 29, 2010 | 2:46 p.m.

Anne this is your statement, your words, "Anne-ection 5(3) - "where needed, humane euthanasia by a licensed veterinarian using lawful techniques deemed "Acceptable" by the American Veterinary Medical Association." - that means no illegal dumping."

I want to know how section 5 means no illegal dumping?

(Report Comment)
Anne Hogan October 29, 2010 | 2:55 p.m.

Jessica, we can go back and forth about why it's not exactly kosher to dump dead puppies in a mass grave, but at the end of the day, Prop B is about stopping cruelty in puppy mills.

If you have a question about Prop B, I would be happy to discuss it with you.

(And just for the record, illegal dumping is, ipso facto, illegal.)

(Report Comment)
Shelley Powers October 29, 2010 | 2:57 p.m.

Jessica, it's my comment, not my report.

And I believe I stated in the comment that it would be difficult, if not impossible, to determine whether the breeder was still selling the dogs, and not reporting the sales to the state.

This makes it extremely difficult to charge them with a Class A misdemeanor of selling dogs in Missouri without a license. So the existing commercial breeding laws have no effect in this case.

Proposition B doesn't allow repeat offenders--repeat offenses result in a Class A misdemeanor. Of course what the state and law enforcement does with these criminal charges is outside to scope of this bill (and existing laws). Actions related to these charges are up to the criminal system to determine.

It's hard to read the rest of your comment. I'm not sure what you're asking, so you'll need to re-phrase it if you want an answer.

(Report Comment)
Michelle Cascio October 29, 2010 | 3:24 p.m.

Actually,
First violations of Prop B are Class C misdemeanors because Prop B sets a higher bar for humane animal care than current Missouri law. If a breeder also falls below the minimal standards in current Missouri law, such violations are a Class A misdemeanor. This graduated structure makes sense, as breeders that fail to even meet the current, inadequate Missouri standards of care should be penalized more severely than those that violate the improved standards of Prop B.

(Report Comment)
Shelley Powers October 29, 2010 | 3:46 p.m.

Ah, thanks for clarification, Michelle. So if a person violates any provision of Proposition B the first time, they're liable for a class C misdemeanor, but if they had previously violated the prevision in the existing law, then that's class A.

Thanks for catching my error and providing correction.

(Report Comment)
Jessica Bryand October 29, 2010 | 5:22 p.m.

So no one was really in violation of dumping dogs? Where in Prop B does it require the cleaning of urine and feces?

(Report Comment)
jim foster October 29, 2010 | 8:20 p.m.

If it isn't HSUS, why didn't one of the 190,000 folks who signed come forward to debate me? 3 times I debated and it was a HSUS rep. Fine Christian morals?

http://kmox.cbslocal.com/shows/mark-rear...

This is the direct link. Go down the page to segment dated 10/25/10 and learn the facts. They want to put criminal charges on breeders. Fines and jail time? What is the end result for telling a fib on someone on a live radio show?

(Report Comment)
Shelley Powers October 29, 2010 | 9:15 p.m.

jim foster, so now you're going to start a conspiracy about this? Really?

The radio show probably picked Barb because she's the one running the Yes On B campaign.

Radio shows try to find the most known people associated with a topic--that's the way they work.

Ask why you're the only No on Proposition B person who ever gets picked.

Thanks for the link.

(Report Comment)
Jessica Bryand October 29, 2010 | 9:26 p.m.

Shelley I think you are wrong! Karen Strange was on the radio just last week!

(Report Comment)
Shelley Powers October 29, 2010 | 9:31 p.m.

I'm listening. The biggest mistake was for Barb to go on the show and debate with you. You're emotionally connected with this issue, and I've read what you've written elsewhere, and you play havoc with facts.

And Barb wasn't making something up, she was mistaken. OK, she was mistaken.

But you all were on the attack, aided and abetted by Reardon. I would never debate you except in writing, when I can fact check you.

And you're bringing up stuff that has already been debunked. You don't have a lot of veracity.

And the line nine thing--what a bunch of bull. You are so desperate to stop this thing, well, I guess you live with yourself.

(Report Comment)
Shelley Powers October 29, 2010 | 9:31 p.m.

And supposedly you debated Wayne Pacelle, where is it?

(Report Comment)
Shelley Powers October 29, 2010 | 9:35 p.m.

And Christian morals? What are you trying to play now?

You realize, don't you, that the further out in left field you take yourself, the fewer people can hear you scream.

(Report Comment)
Jessica Bryand October 29, 2010 | 9:39 p.m.

This link I found very interesting also! You can look up by each year and see reports of animal abuse/neglect. I looked for the last three years. Looks to me as if law enforcement already has enough power. Looks to me as puppy mills are not the largest problem of animal abuse/neglect in Missouri. Hmmmm... I also found this article about calls to the Humane Society!
Pet-Abuse.Com - Animal Abuse Case Details: Dogs abandoned, padlocked in home - East Bonne Terre, MO (US) "I've called the Humane Society in St. Louis," neighbor Gary Manser says. "I've called the Humane Society in Farmington. I've called the Sheriff's department to try and get some help to see if somebody could come over here and take this dog out of that house, and nobody has done nothing. And I'm just at my wit's end about it."
"Investigators forced their way inside and got the dogs out." Apparently they don't need any more power!!!! So how is this law going to get enforcement search warrants any quicker or easier than now? Is that stated in Proposition B?

Read more: Pet-Abuse.Com - Animal Abuse Case Details: Dogs abandoned, padlocked in home - East Bonne Terre, MO (US) http://www.pet-abuse.com/cases/16701/MO/...

http://www.pet-abuse.com/cases/16701/MO/...

(Report Comment)
Jessica Bryand October 29, 2010 | 9:45 p.m.

Well Shelley then lets let another Veterinarian debate Mrs. Schmitz. I would be willing to listen to that also!!! I would bet we will hear the same outcome!!!

(Report Comment)
Mary Haas October 30, 2010 | 4:19 a.m.

Here is proof that the current laws do work to protect all animals, not just those who are breeders.

http://www.news-leader.com/apps/pbcs.dll...

Well generally when I make a mistake I apologize for it. Shelley if all Barbara S did was make a mistake then why doesn't she publicly apologize for it? I cannot stand on the next comment because I did not hear it with my own ears like I heard the slander on Jim, but I was told that when she was questioned about it in another interview instead of saying that she made a mistake she said that she "forgot to tell the truth". IMHO that does not sound like someone who feels they made a mistake, that sounds to me like a kid making an excuse because they got caught with their hand in the cookie Jar.

I can promise you that many of us would be more than gracious to hear her apology, but I am not going to hold my breathe. She did not do her research and she got caught. I bet she cannot apologize because she is not sorry for what she has done.

If she was concerned about others feelings there would be a disclaimer on the Vote Yes site to disclose that wanting more information Automatically puts one on the YES list.

Take about blowing smoke. I called several on that list today and ALL were shocked to know that they were listed. Apparently they must have contacted Barbara as they are no longer their even if they do show up when you google them.

(Report Comment)
Marina Shane October 30, 2010 | 6:44 a.m.

More info about Missouri Puppy Mills & Animal welfare Law in Missouri can be found at: http://www.maal.org/Puppy-Mills.asp
.
Join the Campaign at: www.yesonpropb.com
.
See what a puppy mill looks like:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=60LiJE-Cm...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dhbp7Jz0l...
.
According to the Department of Agriculture, A Blue Ribbon Kennel has exceeded industry standardswhen it comes to the care & welfare of animals. They are held to a higher standard than any other kennel in Missouri.
See what a Blue Ribbon Kennel looks like:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qdI2U6dgA...
A picture says a thousands words.
.
I honestly believe that anyone who understands the horrific impact PUPPY MILLS have in the state of Missouri can only come to one conclusion . This is why Missouri needs better commercial dog breeding laws. Our weak laws are the reason that Missouri is the puppy mill capitol of the United States.
.
Please join me in voting YES on Prop B!
November 2, 2010
.
YOU CAN HELP STOP THE CRUELTY!
VOTE YES on PROP B!

(Report Comment)
Shelley Powers October 30, 2010 | 8:33 a.m.

How many of you have called and harassed people who were listed in the Yes on B endorsements? It sounds like several of you have.

I now know why so many were concerned about going on radio shows or being interviewed for publications--you all initiated a campaign to harass those who endorsed the bill. That was an unconscionable thing to do, and unethical in the extreme.

You were all actively trying to intimidate people, like Jim Foster was doing his best to intimidate Barb on the interview. You say she didn't apologize, well, she didn't have much chance, did she? Between Foster on one hand, and Reardon on the other, she was caught between them badgering her from all sides.

I have read the comments from those on the Yes on B side and No on B sides, and invariably many on the No on B side end up attacking the individuals, rather than the issue. Maybe because someone instructed you all into being so overly aggressive because that will imply you have TRUTH ON YOUR SIDE. Not all on the No on B, and there's been lapses on the Yes on B side, too, but let me let you in on a secret: it typically doesn't work, not if your main interest is persuading people to vote your way.

Jim Foster, I'm sorry a mistake was made. It wasn't an unreasonable mistake, but it was mistake, nonetheless. And yes, I do know why and understand why you are so frantic in your pursuit, because Proposition B is going to personally impact on you. I disagree with those who have become angry with you in comments elsewhere and said they won't bring their pets into to see you again. If they liked you as a vet before, they should continue with you as a vet now. In fact, I hope others bring their pets to you, and if things work out, continue doing so. It's the right thing to do.

I do understand, but it doesn't change the fact that Proposition B is the right thing to do. It is essential, we have to make this change--not only for the dogs, but for ourselves, too. Missourians treating these dogs the way we do now is fundamentally wrong. It hurts the dogs, but it also hurts us--morally, ethically, and in the eyes of the world, which can hurt us financially.

My eyes are wide open to both sides of the issue, and I am voting Yes on Proposition B.

(Report Comment)
Terry Ward October 30, 2010 | 8:52 a.m.

WAYNE PACELLE EATS BABIES!

(Report Comment)
Mark A Landers October 30, 2010 | 12:55 p.m.

Miss ShelleyP,

"intimidate Barb"

All of all the things you've posted this is perhaps the richest.

I have to admitt that I found humor in the absurdity of your statement and laughed. Laughter is healing.

However, the absurdity of euthanizing the group of less than 1,500 that has actually tried to comply with the law in order to stop those that are not following the current laws is NOT laughable.

My quest for sometime has been to try and understand the "how" and "why" of Prop B.

Rather than fix the problems with

1. the enforcement of the current laws,

2. a uniform standard of educational requirements for kennel operators, and

3.consultation with Agricultural Engineers,

4Animal Husbandry experts, and

5Veterinarians,

to assure americans that their pets are raised in the best possible environment would require people to engage the rational part of their brains.

Is this a crime of passion? If so should it be excusable?

I don't know.

I'm trying to forgive.

I'm not there yet.

Vote NO Prop B

Mark A. Landers

(Report Comment)
Michelle Cascio October 30, 2010 | 1:01 p.m.

Mark- did the licensed breeders in the MO Dirty Dozen report comply? No. It seems they were given plenty of opportunity. There are issues with the licensed breeders and the current regulations.
http://yesonpropb.com/media/press-releas...

Once Prop B becomes law and the oversized and substandard breeders start to shut down, the Dept of Ag inspectors will be far less overwhelmed and overburdened and will be better able to do their jobs.

(Report Comment)
Mark A Landers October 30, 2010 | 1:26 p.m.

Miss ShellyP,

People do make mistakes. When they do they can always apologise, change their behavior, and make amends.

Of course the best amends is "a life changed over time".

No one is perfect. Yet I believe humans are prefect in there imperfections. It's a journey.

I inadvertently said in my posts last week that I had finished only 9 AKC Champion dogs this year. My partner read what I wrote when he got home and corrected me. When I wrote that there were actually 10 dogs finished.

I apologise for my error.

Today he called to let me know that LTO Conviction obtained her Championship also. LTO Affability won again and needs only one point to finish so hopefully tomorrow he will make 12 AKC Champions this year.

LTO Prosperity went BOV today.

LTO Goodwill is my next dog to take out. He's here at my feet.

I named him Goodwill because it's something I don't always feel.

But, I've learned to make a list of blessings in my life....the little things...the simple things...that together make life grand.

Then I can begin to feel goodwill toward others again.

Try it. It really works.

Vote NO Prop B

Mark A. Landers

(Report Comment)
Mark A Landers October 30, 2010 | 3:02 p.m.

Michelle,

I do not personally know the details on each of the "dirty dozen". Many of you are aware of the auctions today and yesterday and why.

Michelle, one thing I do know, whatever the of the outcome on the vote on Prop B they will either come into compilance, be shut down, or sell out quickly.

I believe that they will not be the only USDA licensed kennels to either be shut down or come into compliance when Prop B doesn't pass.

The reason I said I am "on thin ice" with USDA, is because I stood up (literally) and told all of the inspectors at the Canine Care Workshop I attended on July 31, 2010. Inclusive of Dr. Robert Gibbens, USDA, Animal Care Western Regional Director.

Words can NOT describe what I felt after reading the audit.
It took me almost three weeks to read that audit with any degree of comphrehension of the the actual content. I was that emotionally reactive.

So I went to the workshop to see Dr. Robert Gibbens. I apparently wasn't the first person to unload on him (oops) so in retrospect...nevermind...he needed unloading on. I will not apologize for my behavior.

My relationship with USDA as a licensed dog breeder began in 1977 or 1978 with licence #43-A-048. I later dropped that "A" license for a "B" license #43-B-038. That "B" was later replaced with my current #43-A-3615. In other words...most of my life I have been USDA licensed.

I remember being so happy to be...

"USDA approved".

No Way!! What I got after that audit was "USDA = puppy mill".

This translates to many different inspectors over the decades. I have never had an inspector that would allow any of the things reported on that audit.

The inspectors I've had have written up things such "a sore on a dog" or "nasal discharge" without a written health sheet on the dog as to what caused the sore and what was being done about it. Plus the inspectors I've had over the decades were willing to sit down and discuss any renovations, improvements I could make, and just share information care of my dogs.

I have a breed with "fused toes" and to not get written up for "swollen area on the feet" I had drag out the AKC breed standard (a breeders bible) for my breeds. Fused toes is acceptable in English Toy Spaniel breed standards and fused pads are common in most of the flat faced breeds.

I mean, really , go to a Wal-Mart and see how many children you can find with a "sore" or a "runny nose".

Michelle, these were the questions I needed answered.

How was that allowed? Were those animals removed? Have those kennels been shut down or brought into compliance?

Do those inspectors still have jobs?

This is about enforcement, not about inadequate laws.

Did I believe things would change...not really...until I've watched the site:

http://www.aphis.usda.gov/newsroom/conte...
continued

At least think about the reasons one should Voting NO on Prop B

Mark A. Landers

(Report Comment)
Michelle Cascio October 30, 2010 | 4:10 p.m.

Mark- thank you for your genuine response. Have faith- it takes time to turn a big ship.

(Report Comment)
Mark A Landers October 30, 2010 | 5:25 p.m.

Michelle,

Thank you for the kind words. None of us want to see animals abused.

This whole thing has cause so much pain for so many people and so many dogs. I am just trying to figure out how it got turned around in backwards fashion in a effort to find a workable solution.

I know Prop B is not the solution.

I did make a promise to Laura Umphenour and Dave. I Promised them at the HUSU meeting in Springfield that I would do everything in my power to assist in finding a solution. I explained why Prop B was not it.
For you that know who I'm mentioning, you can contact them to verify my conduct at that meeting.

I understood these are good and caring people that were trying their best, but did fully understand the ramifications of Prop B if passed into law. They were kind and respectful as was I. We simply listened and shared information.

I understood they had not understood some of the priciples of animal husbandry regulated within Pro B and it's consequences if passed into law.

Laura and I shared laughter, tears, and a hug after the meeting. She got to meet Andrew and Miss Tommy Beth.

Tears are not always a bad thing. After all tears are just God's way of washin' the soul

I do believe laughter is healin'. I am trying to find humor in telling off the head of the western division of the USDA. In that the absurdity of me digging a hole deep enough to bury myself in with USDA at least won't go to waste if prop b passes and I'm euthanised.

I hope you all have a wonder filled day.

Here's a link with a message that also contains humor.
And will explain the meaning of the names of two of my puppies, Anagnorisis and Peripetia.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r-udsIV4H...

Consider the ramifications of your vote when casting your ballot.

Vote No on Prop B
Mark A. Landers
Promises Kept Kennels

(Report Comment)
Ruth Keezer October 30, 2010 | 9:27 p.m.

Does anyone know where we can see the HSUS model kennel built to show Missouri how dog breeders should be housing their breeding dogs? I have heard about it and am anxious to take a tour. I particularly want to see what a Maltese looks (and smells) like after a week on concrete in this perfect kennel. Where on earth did HSUS get their veterinary input to create such a ludicrous and hazardous kennel situation? All you HSUS employees.....have you taken the tour yet?

(Report Comment)
Jessica Bryand October 31, 2010 | 3:05 p.m.

Terry, "Wayne Pacelle Eats Babies?" Really? I thought you were a supporter of Wayne and a big supporter of PETA????

(Report Comment)
Allan Sharrock October 31, 2010 | 5:02 p.m.

Shelly I called several clinics and one out of four had NO idea they were listed and did not support prop b. Why don't you face it HSUS is lying about endorsements. I am really surprised the press isn't going after this story. HSUS is caught in lie after lie and yet you keep supporting them.

(Report Comment)
Jessica Bryand October 31, 2010 | 5:10 p.m.

Ruth, hmmmm... does it not turn a light bulb on that HSUS has the only commercial breeding kennel designs to meet their regulations??? I am searching states to see just how the kennel design company is registered in each state to see just who is profiting off of this!

(Report Comment)
Marina Shane October 31, 2010 | 5:10 p.m.

I talked to hundreds of people yesterday about Prop B. The overwhelming majority.... said they would be voting YES on Prop B. So you puppy millers should be shaking in your boots because your scare tactics, lies, mis-information & propaganda isn't going to work. Missourians are too smart for that crap.
.
VOTE YES! Prop B
Prevent Puppy mill cruelty!
.
It boils down to this... This oppostion to Prop B can't come out and say "Hey, we are only interested in money & how much money we can make off dogs in puppy mills... so in order to get people to vote no...let's scare them by saying that HSUS is the big bad wolf at your door and spread a bunch of mis-information & scare the crap out of people so they will vote no & we can keep doing business as usual."
.
Missourians won't buy it. On Tuesday, Missourians will overwhelmingly support Prop B. Our dogs shouldn't be kept in tiny, filthy stacked cages their entire lives.
.
See what a puppy mill looks like:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=60LiJE-Cm.........
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dhbp7Jz0l.........
.
According to the Department of Agriculture, A Blue Ribbon Kennel has exceeded industry standardswhen it comes to the care & welfare of animals. They are held to a higher standard than any other kennel in Missouri.
See what a Blue Ribbon Kennel looks like:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qdI2U6dgA.........
A picture says a thousands words.
.
More info about Missouri Puppy Mills & Animal welfare Law in Missouri can be found at: http://www.maal.org/Puppy-Mills.asp
.
Join the Campaign at: www.yesonpropb.com
.
I honestly believe that anyone who understands the horrific impact PUPPY MILLS have in the state of Missouri can only come to one conclusion . This is why Missouri needs better commercial dog breeding laws. Our weak laws are the reason that Missouri is the puppy mill capitol of the United States.
.
Please join me in voting YES on Prop B!
November 2, 2010
.
YOU CAN HELP STOP THE CRUELTY!
VOTE YES on PROP B!

(Report Comment)
Shelley Powers October 31, 2010 | 5:28 p.m.

Allan, and you're a reliable source of information because...?

You all are burying the comments here, and the discussions have devolved into personal attacks, and rambles.

Adios folks, we'll see you on the flip side of the election.

(Report Comment)
Marina Shane October 31, 2010 | 5:28 p.m.

Here's what a quick google search turned up.
Google: Promises Kept Kennels Mark Landers
.
Quote from: http://www.englishtoyspan.net/Landers.ht...
"Now, do you think these are the actions of someone wishing to downsize due to health? Absolutely not, this was a chance for him to bring home a lump sum of money for these dogs. After consultation with some of the buyers, I have been informed that they are all terribly frightened of a normal household environment and are very shy. They have a long road ahead of them. Pity for those who are in the hands of other commercial breeders who will see them as livestock just as Mark Landers does."
.
Quote From: http://www.aphis.usda.gov/lpa/news/2003/...
"Jan. 14, 2003--Unlicensed animal dealer Mark Landers of Promises Kept in Hartville, Mo. APHIS intends to show Landers operated without the required USDA license"
.
Sounds like: Promises Kept Kennels & Mark Landers might have MONEY motivations & not animal welfare motivations.... doesn't it?
.
VOTE YES! PROP B!
PREVENT PUPPY MILL CRUELTY!

(Report Comment)
Allan Sharrock October 31, 2010 | 6:50 p.m.

Shelly I am reliable because while people may not agree with my stances they know the one thing I do not do and that is make false claims.

(Report Comment)
Jessica Bryand October 31, 2010 | 10:10 p.m.

Marina, got any facts of abuse, neglect, mistreatment??? Oh someone over in St. Louis Toxix just posted they were a strong Yes and now after seeing the lieing attacks, they will vote NO!!!! Marina, care to answer any of my questions now????

(Report Comment)
Jessica Bryand October 31, 2010 | 10:11 p.m.

Toxix, Ha! Sorry Topix!!

(Report Comment)
Jessica Bryand October 31, 2010 | 10:46 p.m.

Marina probably doesn't do much for the humane society anyway, but I will start with these questions.

How will the law suits against everyone under the Animal Enterprise Terrorist Act be paid for taxpayers?

Another question, along with my other unanswered questions, how is this proposition going to be more effective than Bark Alert? http://dogpostdaily.com/prop-b-puts-rest...

Well do you have rules and regulations on what rescue groups are to follow? "zero expense to the community" so our tax dollars are not paying the salary of these law enforcement officers to investigate or enforce these new regulations?

What gives law enforcement authority to access peoples property without a search warrant to seize dogs?

HSUS has a puppy mill hotline, then I would like to see number of reported calls by state?

Who is going to reimburse the county the wages and transportation costs spent on seizures?

The report was compiled using source data from BBB complaints, results from surveys sent to all 50 states, state and federal agencies, and court cases among other sources, so how much more information would be needed to make this report complete?

I have also asked how Prop B would aid in the care of dogs, how does Prop B keep your examples of matted hair, collars in open wounds, feces, and urine coated dogs??????

Also I don't think anyone ever answered how this keeps dogs from having matted fur and collars causing open wounds on necks?

Do you know, besides what the BBB reported, how many letters and complaints over the years were written to legislators, from Missouri residents or outside of Missouri, demanding new laws in Missouri?

other BBB Reports in other states?

petabuse.com has reported in the last three years, 5-6 puppy mill cases. I think two were licensed. On the two they had been previously cited, and nothing was done, so how will prop b help with no enforcement?

Who will pay the unemployment of the breeders that go out of business?

The report posted all over this site is of dead dumped dogs, how many of those were licensed that prop b would have stopped?

The report on dead dumped dogs shows dogs in a landfill, and dumpster, this is not illegal correct?

Today there was a shelter that had no room, where will the seized dogs be taken when our shelters are full?

Who will pay for the euthanizing and meds for these dogs?

This would help answer a lot of my questions!

(Report Comment)
Marina Shane November 1, 2010 | 9:54 a.m.

JESSICA'S PROP B QUESTION #1 answered... Jessica wrote: "How will the law suits against everyone under the Animal Enterprise Terrorist Act be paid for taxpayers?"
They won't be paid by the taxpayers since they would be FRIVOLOUS & UNFOUNDED. When Prop B Passes, it will be because 192,000 REGISTERED MISSOURI VOTERS signed to put it on the ballot. The AETA does not apply.
(STUPID QUESTION JESSICA...designed to be a SCARE TACTIC & PROPAGANDA)
.
VOTE YES! PROP B
PREVENT PUPPY MILL CRUELTY!

(Report Comment)
Marina Shane November 1, 2010 | 10:01 a.m.

JESSICA'S PROP B QUESTION #2 answered... Jessica wrote: "Another question, along with my other unanswered questions, how is this proposition going to be more effective than Bark Alert? http://dogpostdaily.com/prop-b-puts-rest...
.
Operation Bark Alert: http://mda.mo.gov/animals/pdf/barkalert....
OBA & PROP B Address two different aspects of Missouri's Puppy Mill Problem. Operation Bark Alert (OBA) is a great program with a focus on UNLICENSED BREEDERS. The These breeders can be shut down for doing business WITHOUT A LICENSE, Then, If they want to reopen, they need to be licensed by the state of Missouri. OBA addresses a completely different issue that prop b does. OBA addresses unliscensed breeders. PROP B adds to & clarifies existing laws (including the ACFA) and applies to the REGULATED INDUSTRY OF LARGE SCALE COMMERCIAL DOG BREEDING. THe question of one being more "Effective" than the other is not really applicable since they address different issues.
(This question is a little better than question #1 at least!)
.
VOTE YES! PROP B
PREVENT PUPPY MILL CRUELTY!

(Report Comment)
Marina Shane November 1, 2010 | 10:07 a.m.

JESSICA'S PROP B QUESTION #3 answered... Jessica wrote: "Well do you have rules and regulations on what rescue groups are to follow? "zero expense to the community" so our tax dollars are not paying the salary of these law enforcement officers to investigate or enforce these new regulations?"
.
(This is really Two Questions) First, the rules and regulations on what rescue groups follow do not apply with prop B. PROP B Address dogs in LARGE SCALE COMMERCIALBREEDING FACILITIES who have PERMANENT homes in PUPPY FARMS. Rescue Groups & shelters are TEMPORARY homes for dogs, therefore, Prop B will not apply to shelters & rescue organization. Rescue s & Shelters will continue to follow current animal welfare law.
In answer to the SECOND part of the question: Expenses are to be covered by licensing fees, not a tax increase.
.
VOTE YES! PROP B

(Report Comment)
Marina Shane November 1, 2010 | 10:21 a.m.

JESSICA'S PROP B QUESTION #4 answered... Jessica wrote: "What gives law enforcement authority to access peoples property without a search warrant to seize dogs?"
.
What an INCITEFUL & MISLEADING QUESTION! This question is often posed by the opposition as a SCARETACTIC. PROP B Says NOTHING about seizing dogs, it simply sets a limit of no more than 50 intact breeding dogs. Just as the laws of our state give inspectors the right to contact law enforcement to shut down restaurants not meeting code, the law also give inspectors the right to contact law enforcement to shut down Breeding facilities not meeting code. Under Proposition B, no dogs would be seized. The breeding facility would be shut down & licensed pulled. Then the owner of the dogs can decide whether to comply with law, hopefully, by either spaying/neutering the above 50 intact breeding dogs or selling them. Worst case the owner may choose to turn over the dogs to a rescue or shelter. (Hopefully the owner would not be so cold hearted to shoot their dogs, but I wouldn't put it past some of them since they are not above keeping a dog in a cage the size of a DISHWASHER for it's ENTIRE LIFE) The breeders with over 50intact breeding dogs have ONE YEAR to comply. So it's not like this happens overnight. They have time to sell/find good homes for these dogs.
.
VOTE YES! PROP B
PREVENT PUPPY MILL CRUELTY!

(Report Comment)
Marina Shane November 1, 2010 | 10:29 a.m.

JESSICA'S PROP B QUESTION #5 answered... Jessica wrote: "HSUS has a puppy mill hotline, then I would like to see number of reported calls by state?"
.
I don't work for HSUS, I am a Missourian & a VOLUNTEER for Missouri Alliance for Animal Legislation. I cannot personally attest to #'s called in on this line. If you need to use it though, I googled it for you. The HSUS' puppy mill hotline info page is at: http://www.humanesociety.org/news/press_... and the tipline # is 1-877-MILL-TIP. If you want more info on the number, please contact HSUS!
(Not sure why you think this pertains to Prop B...hope the rest of the questions are more relatied to the issue.)
.
VOTE YES! PROP B
PREVENT PUPPY MILL CRUELTY!

(Report Comment)
Marina Shane November 1, 2010 | 10:35 a.m.

JESSICA'S PROP B QUESTION #6 answered... Jessica wrote: "Who is going to reimburse the county the wages and transportation costs spent on seizures?"
.
That's like asking who is going to reimburse the county the wages & transportation costs spent on drug & alcohol enforcement or murder investigations. It's a dumb question & one used OFTEN by the opposition to take attention away from the real issue of Prop B....Preventing Puppy Mill Cruelty. The answer is, we already pay taxes to ensure our laws are upheld. There is no additional tax strictly on enforcing Prop B. And there are no seizures legislated in Prop B ( see answer to question #4 for more info on theis SCARETACTIC used by the opposition)
.
VOTE YES! PROP B
PREVENT PUPPY MILL CRUELTY!

(Report Comment)
Marina Shane November 1, 2010 | 10:44 a.m.

JESSICA'S PROP B QUESTION #7 answered... Jessica wrote: "The report was compiled using source data from BBB complaints, results from surveys sent to all 50 states, state and federal agencies, and court cases among other sources, so how much more information would be needed to make this report complete?"
.
QUOTE FROM THE SOURCES SECTION of the BBB document:
"Sources used in this study include: BBB databases including complaints; responses to surveys sent to authorities in
50 states; the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA); the Missouri Department of Agriculture (MDA); inspection
reports of federally licensed breeders, wholesalers, and intermediate handlers located in Missouri; the Internet sites of Missouri dog breeders; state and federal audits of animal care agencies; classified ads; court suits involving retailers and suppliers of puppies; U.S. Department of Transportation records; news reports; and shoppings by BBB personnel. The data in this study is accurate as of the date of the study’s publication.
The BBB was hindered in its investigation by failure of Missouri and federal authorities to make timely responses to
requests for information. For example, a questionnaire with 15 questions was sent to the Missouri Department of
Agriculture on Sept. 13, 2009. The BBB did not receive answers to the 15 questions until two-and-a-half months
later, several weeks after other states had responded to the survey. A request for additional information was made
Dec. 7, 2009. The BBB has yet to receive the information. At the federal level, the BBB requested information from
the USDA on Sept. 16 and was referred to the office that responds to Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests.
The BBB was told by the FOIA office that it does not respond to questions, only to requests for records. The FOIA
office referred the BBB back to the initial contact person to respond to the questions and four months after the
original request, he has yet to respond."
.
Sounds pretty complete to me! Read the complete document for yourself here: http://stlouis.bbb.org/Storage/142/Docum...

.
VOTE YES! PROP B
PREVENT PUPPY MILL CRUELTY!

(Report Comment)
Marina Shane November 1, 2010 | 10:49 a.m.

JESSICA'S PROP B QUESTION #8 answered... Jessica wrote: "I have also asked how Prop B would aid in the care of dogs, how does Prop B keep your examples of matted hair, collars in open wounds, feces, and urine coated dogs??????"
.
This has been answered MULTIPLE TIMES already... but here we go again...
Prop B Adds to & Clarifies existing law regarding the regulation of large scale commercial dog breeding facilities.
For example regarding the care of dogs: Current law under the ACFA (Animal Care Facilities act) requires that Vet visit the facility once per year. It does NOT require an annual examination of EACH dog once per year. When Prop B passes, EACH dog will be REQUIRED to have an ANNUAL vet exam.
.
VOTE YES! PROP B
PREVENT PUPPY MILL CRUELTY!

(Report Comment)
Marina Shane November 1, 2010 | 11:07 a.m.

JESSICA'S PROP B QUESTION #9 answered... Jessica wrote: "Also I don't think anyone ever answered how this keeps dogs from having matted fur and collars causing open wounds on necks?"
.
Sounds like a repeat of Question #8... (So see question #8) Also, Prop B calls for prompt treatment of Illness or injury by a veteranian". (So Jessica if the dog has open wounds from it's collar, it should see a vet! And why does the breeder keep it's collar that tight in the FIRST PLACE? Sounds like the breeder has more than 50 dogs & cannot adequately give anough attention to each dog to see that it's collar is too tight! Prop B limits to 50 intact breeding dogs allowing each dog 20 minutes of individual attention in an eight hour shift)
.
VOTE YES! PROP B
PREVENT PUPPY MILL CRUELTY!

(Report Comment)
Marina Shane November 1, 2010 | 11:23 a.m.

JESSICA'S PROP B QUESTION #10 answered... Jessica wrote: "Do you know, besides what the BBB reported, how many letters and complaints over the years were written to legislators, from Missouri residents or outside of Missouri, demanding new laws in Missouri?"
.
Personally, I have no idea what letters or complaints are written to our legislators. I don't think our legislators make personal letters public documents. If you need to know that, I would suggest contacting the legislators individually. If you want personal letters of complaints about missouri dog breeders... google it. They are plentiful online!
.
VOTE YES! PROP B
PREVENT PUPPY MILL CRUELTY!

(Report Comment)
Marina Shane November 1, 2010 | 11:26 a.m.

JESSICA'S PROP B QUESTION #11 answered... Jessica wrote: "petabuse.com has reported in the last three years, 5-6 puppy mill cases. I think two were licensed. On the two they had been previously cited, and nothing was done, so how will prop b help with no enforcement?"
.
And this question reltates to the issue HOW? That's right it doesn't! If you want a reply to a specific case, you need to provide the link to that specific information.
.
VOTE YES! PROP B
PREVENT PUPPY MILL CRUELTY!

(Report Comment)
Marina Shane November 1, 2010 | 11:35 a.m.

JESSICA'S PROP B QUESTION #12 answered... Jessica wrote: "Who will pay the unemployment of the breeders that go out of business?"
.
Actually, Jessica... BAD breeders don't employ that many people and the few that do employ people make minimum wage or cash under the table. That's why they are BAD breeders to start with! They care more about profit than care. Dumb Question & yet another SCARE TACTIC from the opposition. Good Breeders are already at or above the standards of care provided for with Prop B. If breeding facilities go out of business that are cruel & inhumane to dogs in their care, then those are some jobs I'll gladly lose in Missouri! Other industries are expected to re-invest in their busiesses from time to time. The commercial dog breeding industry should be no different With clear, humane standards in place, consumers will have more confidence in Missouri Dog Breeders & it will help their long-term business outlook.
.
VOTE YES! PROP B
PREVENT PUPPY MILL CRUELTY!

(Report Comment)
Marina Shane November 1, 2010 | 11:54 a.m.

JESSICA'S PROP B QUESTION #13 answered... Jessica wrote: "The report posted all over this site is of dead dumped dogs, how many of those were licensed that prop b would have stopped?"
.
I am not an inspector, so I can not tell personally tell you which would be closed with the passage of Prop B, but I can tell you that those with MDA licenses & with over 50 dogs (Of which there were many on that report) would be impacted by Prop B. I do know that it will be hard for the HUNTE CORPORATION to BURY 220lbs of DEAD DOGS A MONTH after Prop B passes & limits them to breeding 50 dogs. The 50 breeding dog limit would also make hard for the second breeder (also Missouri Licensed) on that list DUMP 40 dead dogs at an Open Dump site. Should I go on?
.
VOTE YES! PROP B
PREVENT PUPPY MILL CRUELTY!

(Report Comment)
Marina Shane November 1, 2010 | 12:04 p.m.

JESSICA'S PROP B QUESTION #14 answered... Jessica wrote: "The report on dead dumped dogs shows dogs in a landfill, and dumpster, this is not illegal correct?"
.
The report we are talking about BTW (WARNING GRAPHIC IMAGES OF DEAD DOGS FORM PUPPY MILLS) can be seen here:
https://hsus.salsalabs.com/o/17003/image...

The law applying to the "Disposal of Dead Animals" can be read here:
http://www.moga.mo.gov/statutes/c200-299...

I'm not a lawyer, inspector or police officer, but IMO, It looks like most if not all were illegally dumped.

VOTE YES! PROP B
PREVENT PUPPY MILL CRUELTY!

(Report Comment)
Marina Shane November 1, 2010 | 12:07 p.m.

JESSICA'S PROP B QUESTION #14 answered... Jessica wrote: "Today there was a shelter that had no room, where will the seized dogs be taken when our shelters are full?"
.
That's another example of OPPOSITION SCARE TACTICS & MISINFORMATION! PROP B Says NOTHING about seizing dogs, it simply sets a limit of no more than 50 intact breeding dogs. (See answer to question #4 for more info)
.

VOTE YES! PROP B
PREVENT PUPPY MILL CRUELTY!

(Report Comment)
Marina Shane November 1, 2010 | 12:09 p.m.

JESSICA'S PROP B QUESTION #15 answered... Jessica wrote: "Who will pay for the euthanizing and meds for these dogs?"
.
Yet ANOTHER example of OPPOSITION SCARE TACTICS & MISINFORMATION!
PROP B Says NOTHING about seizing dogs, it simply sets a limit of no more than 50 intact breeding dogs. (See answer to question #4 for more info).

.

VOTE YES! PROP B
PREVENT PUPPY MILL CRUELTY!

(Report Comment)
Marina Shane November 1, 2010 | 12:10 p.m.

JESSICA'S PROP B QUESTION #16 answered... Jessica wrote: "Today there was a shelter that had no room, where will the seized dogs be taken when our shelters are full?"
.
Yet ANOTHER example of OPPOSITION SCARE TACTICS & MISINFORMATION!
PROP B Says NOTHING about seizing dogs, it simply sets a limit of no more than 50 intact breeding dogs. (See answer to question #4 for more info).

.

VOTE YES! PROP B
PREVENT PUPPY MILL CRUELTY!

(Report Comment)
l Sippel November 1, 2010 | 12:47 p.m.
This comment has been removed.

Leave a comment

Speak up and join the conversation! Make sure to follow the guidelines outlined below and register with our site. You must be logged in to comment. (Our full comment policy is here.)

  • Don't use obscene, profane or vulgar language.
  • Don't use language that makes personal attacks on fellow commenters or discriminates based on race, religion, gender or ethnicity.
  • Use your real first and last name when registering on the website. It will be published with every comment. (Read why we ask for that here.)
  • Don’t solicit or promote businesses.

We are not able to monitor every comment that comes through. If you see something objectionable, please click the "Report comment" link.

You must be logged in to comment.

Forget your password?

Don't have an account? Register here.

advertisements