jmscott Posted September 11, 2013 Share Posted September 11, 2013 · Hidden Hidden Deleted Link to comment
jmscott Posted September 11, 2013 Author Share Posted September 11, 2013 · Hidden Hidden Deleted Link to comment
Mobezilla Posted September 11, 2013 Report Share Posted September 11, 2013 That's awful!!! I knew that we were fighting against this I really can't believe its in effect, byb's don't pay for health testing so of course they'll have extra money to pay for any license they'll need when reputable breeders will get the short end of the stick Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmscott Posted September 11, 2013 Author Share Posted September 11, 2013 · Hidden Hidden Deleted Link to comment
Jay Posted September 11, 2013 Report Share Posted September 11, 2013 I did some research on this and it looks like it was not a "law" that was passed, but rather that APHIS, which was created in 1972, revised the definition of a "retail pet store" to address the issue on online breeders, since some were selling puppies without the buyer even seeing the pup. This was not congress that passed it, rather than the agency making regulatory changes. The full context of the changes can be found here: http://www.aphis.usda.gov/newsroom/2013/09/retail_pet_final_rule.shtml Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmscott Posted September 11, 2013 Author Share Posted September 11, 2013 · Hidden Hidden Deleted Link to comment
Jay Posted September 11, 2013 Report Share Posted September 11, 2013 I am kind of confused. Where did you see it makes the law very broad? from what I read on the USDA website is that it does the opposite. It was because people were breeding and selling puppies online, and they did not have to conform to the same standards as brick and motar stores. Since the agency was created before the internet it never caught up with the times. All it did was update the meaning of "pet stores" to include online businesses. I don't see where ethical breeders are affected, those breeders are already inspected by the USDA. I am not sure why we would not be able to keep dogs in our own home either. That change had nothing to do with dog owners. Unless we are not talking about the same agency. Yes, this has already been a law. but they have made it very broad now and its to the point where ethical breeders won't be able to afford it. Not to mention we won't be able to keep our dogs in our own home. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuskyCouture Posted September 11, 2013 Report Share Posted September 11, 2013 Q. Will regulated breeders who keep their dogs in their homes have to put them in a kennel? A. Generally not. The AWA regulations defi ne a “primary enclosure†to mean any structure or device used to restrict animals to a limited amount of space— which means that a home can be considered a dog’s primary enclosure. If a room of a house is used as a dog’s primary enclosure (for instance, a whelping room or nursery), AWA regulations and standards apply to that room. However, if a dog breeder allows his or her dogs to have free run of the entire house, we have to determine whether the home can house the animals within AWA standards. If the breeder has a kennel or cages that the dogs can stay in inside the home that meet AWA standards, the breeder has satisfi ed the primary enclosure requirements. A number of currently licensed wholesale breeders maintain their animals in their homes. The dog can still be in the house, but there should be kennels in the home as well.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.