Whistle in the dark, pretend that your dogs and hobby are safe, that there is no HSUS, no media portraying the breeding of dogs as evil, and that no one is trying to make it illegal to have meat to feed anybody, dogs or humans. In your unique world, towns with no limit laws don't exist, and I suppose neither does the animal control officer or the AKC in that world. You find her at fault for having lots of dogs or puppies and dogs. Realize that the average person thinks that anyone with more than one or two dogs is weird, as is showing dogs. What gives someone the right to say that her hobby is dangerous, but yours is not? Is it because she has GSDs instead of Labs? What if they suddenly start citing the sizes of dogs dangerous, as was done in part of Germany, where a Lab is considered dangerous by its size, over 40 lb? Will that get your attention?

I had a similar situation with only 9 adult dogs at the time.

I was fined for not having a business license. The county would not give business license for a kennel, so I had to move.

There was no business going on just a couple of litters/year and my dogs would all be indoor dogs.

Would't it have been easier for to just buy the kennel license, and stay under the radar?
Yes, 17 lg dogs in a house is too many. How can they get enough excercise ?
I lived in a lovely residential area , and had two dogs , one Ch. being pregnant, I sold my house , moved to the country, buy my kennel license and have my vaccines and records in order , to stay out of the lime light. It's a good thing to do.

IDK, yes you and some of the others are missing the point. You all tend to focus solely on a person's numbers without taking into consideration other factors. It's nothing more than a judgmental reaction from those snobby show breeders who think that only people who breed and take care of dogs like themselves should be allowed to breed. From the information given, this person has done nothing wrong. The dogs were not in poor conditions. I have heard that several dog club members with the above type of attitude or jealous over the success or just hatred toward another person has sparked anonymous complaints to NJ AC.

Joan is very correct here that if this person loses her dogs and the judge rules that she is indeed conducting a business, that it will affect all of us who consider ourselves "hobby breeders." How many of you are lucky enough to live in a residential area that allow businesses to be conducted from the home? How many of us will be able to spend thousands to construct kennels that are in compliance with the USDA?

I also read an interesting blog the other day about how essentially owning and breeding dogs are already illegal since in most areas you must obtain a special license or permit in order to own and breed. Now there's a scary thought.

It's just really sad when people go out of their way trying to make trouble for someone else.

Be careful what you wish for. This is the same state where if you don't crate your dog, you could be charged this year with animal cruelty by overly zealous SPCA officers armed with guns. Don't forget that animal abuse is in the eye of the beholders, or those wishing to make money off charges or get or "seize" nicely bred, well socialized dogs for adoption events when the southern dogs and overseas dogs are lacking. A Lab breeder living in a commercial area was pursued by animal "specialists" who accused her of being an abuser because she only had 42 inch crates when the Labs were inside instead of out on the fenced acreage or loose in the house. Charges were dismissed, but her name is still smeared across the internet by animal rights advocates. Is there a coincidence that she was the club's delegate to the NJ Federation of Dog Clubs and lived in the town where the club's specialty was held? I don't know. Is the same crate used inside the house big enough in the vehicle or will SPCA quibble on that, too.

Not to mention that these new restrictions often are laced with hidden agendas and opportunities to tighten the nooses. While we can all agree that animal abuse is wrong and needs to be acknowledged, as NJ stated, it is subjective. Having delved further and further into the animal rights movement and rescues on the East Coast, it's pretty disturbing. Most breeders have no clue and would rather remain ignorant to what is happening. We may think a bill looks good on the outside and think we are doing what's right by agreeing that we'd like to see certain practices stopped, but you must read the whole bill. Many cruel practices are already addressed in current laws that still go unenforced.

I dare anyone who wants to see what we are up against to visit the "I Hate Dog Breeders" group on Facebook. They are well over 10,000 likes and not slowing one bit. They do advocate violence against breeders and Facebook won't take down their group. It's pretty scary if you think you are "better" than any other breeder. They make no distinction. Please do not try to justify your practices to them. They've heard it all before and will eat you up and spit you out before you can say boo.

From IDK - "NJ wants to establish an animal abuser registry and prohibit animal cruelty violators from owning domestic companion animals and from working at animal-related enterprises."

Do you really want this?!!! Do you know that once accused, although falsely, of child abuse in the US, most states keep your name on their registry, even though charges were dismissed?? Our dear friends are spending over $10,000 to get their name off our state's child abuse registry - their overzealous doctor acccused of abuse due to their daughter's eating disorder; charges were almost immediately dropped but their name remains on the registry.

I can just imagine the trumped up abuse charges by a disgruntled relative, an upset neighbor, animal rights activists, an ex, etc. Please NO!