Here goes, and I don't mind saying, I am extremely nervous about posting this as there were only 2 responses the last time. This forum can get pretty hairy but there is also some of the best advise that comes out of here and when the moods are good, some good laughs.

I have been working on letters to send to our our State Representatives. I need help! please. I did send letters via the easy way on the site posted by Gina, THANKS AGAIN, by the way. But I STILL STAND FIRM that we need to help these people propose a bill that will work. I don't know what to do as for suggestions on the Puppy Mill issue, what do you all think should be done? and the auctions? What EXACTLY would define a puppy mill? what would become of the dogs that are in puppy mills now? should a proposal be made to limit the amount of times/frequency a female can be bred? should there be a "rehab" for puppy mill dogs? Who will take them? none of us could take them without jeopordizing our stock. I don't know how the auctions work, are they just for millers or are they for anyone wanting to reduce/buy breeding stock/puppies? What makes dog auctions so bad? I have bunches of questions on these matters myself so I'm sure our congress people do also. Is it the care that dogs receive or don't receive that constitute a puppy mill? or the amount of dogs they have? I see some sites (reputable too)with 20 to 30 dogs, probably more, as some aren't old enough for breeding or showing. Most boast they only raise 1 to 3 litters a year. One Field Lab breeder boasts 150 puppies per year and is thought very highly of, she fosters them with families, has a trainer and has made quite a name for herslf. Yet another breeder does it and they are thought a puppy mill with a huge facility and "too many puppies", quoted on this forum. I know the first lady's history much better as I too have Field Labs and own some of her stock. Notice I am not naming names. My last question is this...If a person makes their living at breeding and raising dogs does that make them a puppy mill? If they use quality stock, get the necessary clearences, handles, socializes and cares properly for the dogs and puppies. How many litters/puppies is too many? and WHY? How many dogs are too many? and WHY? Should there be a limit? and why?

When answering this post, please no flames, nothing gets accomplished like that, and, ***make sure intelligence and common sense override emotions***. (Put the i over the e in this one).

I will offer to share my letter and my real name with anyone who would like to read it before I send it in and will offer it and my real name if responders aren't "Flame Throwers". This is something I have gained a passion for and want to follow through with 'till the end. TIA.

Sorry, but once you pass any bill that puts any number limits on dogs/litters/etc..., you're on a slippery slope. We already have laws that deal with neglect and abuse, and as long as the dogs are well cared-for, it's really none of the government's business how many dogs/litters we have.

Join the NAIA and other lobbying organizations and you'll see that all breeders, whether hobby or commercial (high-volume, not already-illegal horrid puppy mill conditions), need to stand together to retain any rights to breed - the AR's want to split breeders, create "infighting" - generally the "divide and conquer" theory. So please rethink your attitude. I agree, while most of us look down upon the high-volume breeders, we all need to work together or we'll all be out of a hobby or job!

I don't have answers for you because I haven't been involved in the breed for very many years. I do, however, have a few more questions that might help to come up with some parameters. Perhaps they could be answered by people with more experience.
- How many adult dogs would be an unacceptable number on one property? Even if they are all properly maintained, what number, in your minds, is too many for everyone to have the necessary socialization? (12? 15? More?) Is it reasonable to ask for an additional licensing fee (relatively high) for dogs in excess of that number, puppies not sold being excluded?
- Would it be reasonable to put a cap on the number of unaltered dogs on the property over the age of, say, 6 mos.? This would allow for unsold puppies and some who are being kept to "turn out," but who are not old enough to be a part of the breeding stock. This would also allow for no limitations on the number of altered retirees.
After seeing what has just been pushed through in CA, it appears that some states or cities are going to insist upon passing something. I am not at all familiar with the details of this legislation in Ohio, but I entertain no doubts that this is a state which will have to put through some piece of legislation because of the puppymill problem there. It's probably better to be a part of the discussion.

Okay, you just don't get it! Once you pass any "number" law, it's easy to change (reduce) that number - easier than getting the law passed in the first place. You don't need ANY numbers put into ANY bills - it's a very slippery slope that you don't want to go down!

Join PetLaw on Yahoogroups and you'll get a quick education on the problems around the country and all the efforts to try and squelch the AR's efforts to elimate all domesticated animals (which is their bottom-line goal).

Thanks! I just had a past replyer and she had made mention that we need to come up with stricter laws for pet stores and puppy mills but she did not elaborate. That's why I have all of the questions. These are all hypothetical questions...and am looking for opinions. Thanks again for replying.

Anyone else?

Wasn't my post..I DO get it Patty...the post is someone elses, I happen to agree with you. I feel No One should be allowed to dictate how many dogs a person can own. I just didn't want o post my opinion until I got others opinions. Thanks

Agree that putting numbers down will just give more openings for future legislation.
These ARs know that they cannot do it all at once so they are just methodically chipping away a little at a time.
Several years ago, I read a transcript(provided by someone who was undercover at an AR meeting) in which these very same plans were discussed and they have pretty much stayed on course with them all along.
They have been working away at all of this for years while the rest of us went about our daily lives,which is exactly what they thought would happen.
In Ohio, I am wondering if there is not another issue involved and that is more tax revenue for the state.

I agree Barb and in my letter I have also pointed out that the amount of those surety bonds are rediculous and can cause "corruption of office, overzeolous officials and hardships". and that I felt is was unconstitutional and unfair that we be taxed and bonded on dogs and other animals are not ie., horses, cows, etc. It is all agriculture that consists of the housing and husbandry of animals.

Thank you Barb!

More please.

I really need help on the puppy mill issue, how can it be changed for the better? without numbers. I need ideas on the auction issue, how can it be changed and also the pet store industry...those are the 3 things pointed out after my original post of "We have to do something, Get a cup of coffee, it's gonna be a long one.
I am going to attend a dog auction if I can find one to see for myself what they really are. I probably wouldn't go to someone's place that had a puppy mill as I wouldn't want to bring cooties home.

Does everyone agree about setting standards for doghouses, footing and kennel sizes? what about the pre-purchace exam that I mentioned? and health guarantees?

No, we don't all agree about setting standards for sizes of dog houses, etc... What that leads to is no dogs in your house - you need certain kennel accomodations for every dog you have, regardless of whether it sleeps on your bed. I would venture to guess that Ohio already had laws governing the conditions of dogs at auctions - the laws simply need to be better enforced. Think about it - if the laws can't be enforced now, how are they going to enforce new, more stringent ones - oh, they'll just come to your house because you are easy to find, and make you adhere to them.

Again - if you (any of you) are interested in learning about how the world of dog politics works, please join the PetLaw group on Yahoo!

Point taken.

Then do you feel that the bill should just be oppposed and no other suggestions be made?

I tried to find minimum standards to house a dog in Ohio...shelter, food and water.

I will join PetLaw group on Yahoo today.

Guess I better join the Yahoo group, too. This whole thing is so hopeless.
There's got to be some answer as to how to stop the bad breeders without hurting the good breeders. I just don't know what that answer is.

This is the point I have been trying to make for a long time. You cannot legislate ethics.

Me either...It lies in our humane officers I guess but they are so overwhelmed they can't keep up, the shelters are so full. I stopped by our local shelter yesterday...it's not the breeders that are the problem, it's the public. Some of the excuses they gave for dumping a dog or cat was just rediculous. There was an old Boxer out there, he looked to be about 10 years or more old and had a tumor on his chin and on the side of his face. The reason given was that they couldn't afford the proper vet care. If he were mine I would have had him put down but they just dumped him and it's a no kill facility so he'll lay there and wonder for the rest of his days. People don't realize that a dog lives in the moment, they don't live in the past nor the future they know us as the "All Mighty" and can't wait for us to return to them. It was a shame.
Oh and get this...they raided a property that had pit bulls for fighting, 11 in all and 3 were badly injured, costing over a thousand dollars a piece in vet bills. Now they have to provide the vet care but they don't know if they are going to be adoptable as the fighting may have caused aggression SO when they get all done with the surgeries and the mending they'll temperment test them, if they fail, they will be destroyed! Shouldn't there be a cap for those kind of expenses? Again, emotions overriding intelligence and common sense.