2) You already bred 2 of your bitches and there are 17 puppies on the ground and registered. That darn bitch you
co-own just had 12 puppies ---- you might need a USDA license.

3) If you are a handler and you come back from Crufts with dogs purchased for your clients YOU might need a
USDA license.

4) If you are a handler and your clients bring their litters to you to sell YOU might need a USDA license

5) If you are that breeder who had their handler sell your puppies, your handler must turn you in and YOU might
need a USDA license

6) If you have great lines and want to sell your dogs to another show/breeder (even part interest) YOU might
need a USDA license

7) If you don't alter your puppies before they leave and one of your pet puppies is bred you just sold breeding
stock and YOU might need a USDA license

8) If “oops” you sell an Irish Wolfhound and his new owner actually uses the breed to hunt You just sold a hunting
dog and YOU might need a USDA license

9) If you breed just one litter in a year, but decide to sell one or two of your retired show dogs, YOU might need a
USDA license.

10) If your breeding partner, who co-owns all your queen cats with you, breeds and raises more than three litters
in one year in her home and you do the same in your home, YOU BOTH might need USDA licenses.

11) If your popular stud dog breeds five bitches belonging to other breeders, on your premises, and you, in turn,
use him to breed just two of your bitches, YOU might need a USDA license.

12) If you breed no more than one or two litters in a year, but do some private rescue, fostering, and placement
on the side, for which you charge new owners a modest fee just to help with expenses, YOU might need a USDA
license.

13) If you co-own seven or eight bitches, all close in age, none living with you, but all are bred in one year, YOU
might need a USDA license, even if you breed infrequently in your own home.

14) If you are a very small hobby breeder & you buy a puppy from a breeder in CANADA (only a few miles from
your home in the US) you might need a USDA license!

15) If you rescue within the breed you show, and somehow end up with more unaltered animals than the law
allows, you might need a USDA license.

16) If you think “it is not my problem, we should regulate Puppy Mills”. . .
YOU might need a USDA license
because DORIS DAY ANIMAL LEAGUE vs VENEMAN ANN will be in Court again and 
this time DDAL will WIN!
OPPOSE PAWS! Stop It In Committee!!!!
Call (202) 224-2035 

Why would I oppose any regulation that is supposedly aimed at
improving conditions for animals raised in squalor?

It is precisely because this bill will have an adverse affect on many
hobby breeders like myself who raise their animals in far better
conditions, and with far more care than any USDA regulated facility
could ever provide.

The legislation is seriously flawed.

Most obvious is the use of capricious and arbitrary numerical
limitations. For instance, at what point is 6 litters healthy and 7
litters unhealthy? How can selling 25 Saint Bernards from a non-USDA
facility be acceptable while selling 26 peek-a-poos would require USDA
inspection. There is a certain amount of manure that should be considered
here and I'm not talking about what emanates from the dogs.

Less obvious is the division of sellers into certain classes. And the
restrictions placed on those classes are inequitable.

For the purpose of making this clear, lets call these classes "pets
stores," "(Sellers of)furry animals (other than dogs and cats)," "(sellers
of) 6 litters," "sellers of 25," and "transporter/brokers."

Please bear with me- this is complicated - but I didn't write this
legislation.

The "pet store" cannot sell a single imported dog, whereas
the "seller of 25" can sell 25 and not be required to be USDA
inspected. How does that benefit the dogs?

The "pet store" cannot sell a single "hunting dog" such as a beagle
or cocker spaniel, but the "sellers of 25" can, again without USDA
oversight. How does that benefit the dogs?

The sellers of "6 litters" or "25" can easily gross $20,000 without
USDA oversight, but the 4H rabbit breeder cannot sell 13 pet purebred
rabbits at $40 each with crossing the $500 gross income threshold placed on
sellers of "furry animals." What health and welfare benefits do those
rabbits lovingly raised by a young child learning responsibility and animal
husbandry gain?

The "pet store" cannot sell any dogs for "breeding purposes" (intact)
whereas all other sellers, above or below the thresholds, have no such
restrictions. How does the benefit the dogs?

The "transporter or broker" can escape USDA regulation simply by
selling 1 dog a year, qualifying as one who sells no more than 25.
And yet a broker or transporter who sells no dogs would be regulated. How
does that benefit the dog?

The restrictions on pet stores make no sense at all. Why is it
acceptable for a pet store in upstate New York to import 500 dogs
from Kansas but not 5 from 20 miles away in Canada? Why is it OK for a
small scale seller in the same town to sell 25 dogs imported from China?
Both would be unregulated under PAWS. How does this benefit the dogs?

Why are hunting dogs, such as Cockers and Beagles, which make
wonderful pets, singled out? How does this benefit the dogs?

Why the forced sterilization of pet store dogs at a young age? Early
spay/neutering can have profound developmental effects (think boys choir
eunuch) on growing puppies. How does this benefit the dogs?

My cat friends tell me that practices for hobby breeders of cats are
profoundly different than with dogs and that the isolation required
by USDA facilities will cause serious problems with requisite early
socialization. How does this benefit the cats?

The limitation of 25 will also be imposed on rescue organizations who take
in placement fees to help with expenses. Many of those "shelter" the dogs
and cats in individual homes. As an association, if they exceed 25, they
will be required to keep those dogs in USDA puppy factory type settings-
while what the dogs MOST need is a loving caring home situation where they
can be socialized and trained. How does that benefit the dogs?

While there may be legitimate concerns about abuse to animals, "puppy
mills" being the one most often cited, those concerns can already be
addressed through existing laws, and are best addressed at the state and
local level. One of the most critical problems in animal welfare involves
"hoarding," a mental illness. PAWS does not address this problem at all (no
sales are involved), but again these cases have been successfully handled
on a state basis, with no federalization of the crime or sickness.

I could go on and on, but I hope that you are seeing that this
legislation is seriously flawed and completely inadvisable. There is
a web-based questionnaire that will walk you through the various and sundry
exemptions to PAWS that reveals once and for all how absurd this regulation
is.

See _http://smythwicks.org/paws_ (http://smythwicks.org/paws)
I can only assume that the division into these different categories is an attempt to divide and conquer. 
The Animal Rights agenda is well known- they wish to eliminate all hunting, all breeding, and
eventually all ownership of dogs and other animals. If you support
this bill then you are supporting their agenda.

How does this benefit the dogs?
 

-Bill Fawcett
Harrisonburg, VA