Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

USDA seeks change to regulate Internet pet sales
Associated Press ^ | May 10, 2012 | TRACIE CONE

Posted on 05/11/2012 5:43:22 AM PDT by Gennie

Dog breeders who skirt animal welfare laws by selling puppies over the Internet would face tighter scrutiny under a rule change proposed Thursday by the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

The change would subject dog owners who breed more than four females and sell the puppies electronically, by mail or over the phone to the same oversight faced by wholesale dealers as part of the Animal Welfare Act.

That law, written in 1966, set standards of care for animals bred for commercial sale and research. Retail sales were exempt from inspections under the assumption that anyone who visited the store could see whether the animals appeared healthy and cared for.

The Internet opened a new venue for puppy sales, and thousands of large-scale breeders who advertise there have not been subject to oversight or inspection.

The proposed change seeks to close that loophole by ensuring that anyone who sells pets over the Internet, by phone or mail order can no longer do so sight-unseen. Sellers either must open their doors to the public so buyers can see the animals before they purchase them, or obtain a license and be subject to inspections by the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.

"We feel this is certainly a much-needed change to an outdated system," said Rebecca Blue, deputy undersecretary for marketing and regulatory programs.

(Excerpt) Read more at ...

TOPICS: Government; Miscellaneous; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: dogs; internet; netneutrality; puppies; usda
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-50 last
To: Gennie

This thing is an absolute mess, Gennie. For example, you are exempt as long as puppy buyers come to your home only. Well, hello Craigslist. The USDA wants to force you to open your home to every Tom, Dick & Harry who wants to “see the puppies”. Ok, never mind this opens you up to Parvo, Distemper and whatever else was at the other breeder this person visited earlier that day, it also opens your home to persons who might be scouting out their next break-in.

If a person breeds something rare, this limits others’ options who might want a pup, but who live too far away from the puppies to drive.

Ok, so the USDA will open up discussion for 60 days. Do you think for a second PETA and HSUS will not flood their inboxes with approval messages? How do we get enough opposition to be heard?

41 posted on 05/11/2012 10:40:08 AM PDT by Darnright ("I don't trust liberals, I trust conservatives." - Lucius Annaeus Seneca)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Darnright
You're exactly right. I don't even allow people onto my property until first shots and have had people fight with me, TOO BAD. PETA I have not seen give approval yet, but I didn't do an internet search. However HSUS practically gave it a standing ovation -

So you KNOW it's bad. As far as getting enough opposition, we would need ALL (good lol) BREEDERS to come out for this, as well as ANYONE standing on behalf of liberty and freedom.

I was so upset and sick when I read this yesterday, I saw it on Drudge. A few hours later I went back to look and it was already off? WTF? I would think something like that, which is regulating the sales and breeding of ALL domestic animals, would be a bit important? I don't understand how they could even TRY something like this!! Are they expecting enough people to be asleep or what? I've already heard someone on Facebook that is SUPPOSEDLY "limited government" minded support this, I gave them a piece of my mind, but when people hear "Oh, it's for the puppies!" they think it's a good thing. Ugh.
42 posted on 05/11/2012 10:59:50 AM PDT by Gennie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Gennie

Ironic that a human male can donate sperm to anonymous women and sire hundreds of children - but dog breeders are under scrutiny for shipping semen & puppies to identifiable purchasers.

Follow the money!!!!!

43 posted on 05/12/2012 3:45:02 AM PDT by sodpoodle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: sodpoodle

Another concerned AKC Breeder Of Merit .
Count me in to fight this!

44 posted on 05/12/2012 5:19:47 AM PDT by wndycndy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Gennie
Durbin, Vitter commend USDA rule to regulate online puppy sales

WASHINGTON, D.C. — U.S. Senators Dick Durbin (D-IL) and David Vitter (R-LA) commended the U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA) Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) for closing a loophole that allows domestic puppy mills selling puppies via the internet to escape regulation and avoid inspection. This rule, which will specifically apply to large breeders, is an important step towards ensuring that pets sold over the Internet are treated humanely and receive proper care. Last year, Durbin and Vitter introduced the Puppy Uniform Protection and Safety Act, which would close the same loophole and require previously unregulated breeders to be licensed and to undergo inspections.


In October 2011, Durbin and Vitter wrote to Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack to urge USDA to close this unnecessary loophole through regulatory action, rather than requiring additional congressional action.
45 posted on 05/13/2012 8:31:06 AM PDT by Gennie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ohiobuckeye1997

I kind of wondered how this will work. If you sell ANY puppies over the internet or sight unseen, even tho you also sell puppies locally? When I was actually showing and breeding, I did sometimes sell a puppy to someone in another state via word of mouth with only phone contact and photos, videos, etc. Does this mean I would have suddenly come under this legislation if I had 4 or more intact females? I think this could hit many hobby/show breeders if it does. As always, the Federal Government wants to be in our lives, but they use the excuse it’s “for the children” or “the sweet little abused puppies”.
In fact, I currently do not breed (I have a beautiful champion bitch with all of her clearances who will not have a litter) mostly because I live where there is an onerous breeder permit law. I do pay a 75$ licensing fee for the privilege of not spaying her yet. I would have never thought Americans would agree that the government could tell them what surgery they had to do to their dogs. We live in CrazyTown.

46 posted on 05/15/2012 12:00:12 PM PDT by brytlea (An ounce of chocolate is worth a pound of cure)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Gennie

Most people not involved in dog sports think this kind of law is a good idea. And in fact, some of my friends involved in dogs agree because they hate commercial breeders so much. They are short sighted, but not everyone is smart, face it. If they were we wouldn’t be where we are as a country.

47 posted on 05/15/2012 12:03:07 PM PDT by brytlea (An ounce of chocolate is worth a pound of cure)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: brytlea
It sounds like your friends are acting out of emotion and their hearts rather than their heads and that's where the libs get a lot of people. Most fellow dog breeders I converse with, think this is absolutely awful. I read back over the proposal, and from how I understand this, if you have more than 4 intact "breeding" females, even if you do not necessarily BREED them all at the same time, you will be subject to USDA federal licensing and inspections. The 4 and under exemption is only for people who only sell their puppies at their home and do not take deposits or ship "sight unseen".

In the case of rare breeds that are only limited to a few hundred throughout the country, this could be disastrous as most breeders would most likely not want to be inspected and follow requirements such as stainless steel whelping boxes, concrete kennels, etc. and whatever other draconian implementations they require versus a loving home. What's interesting is that there are already laws in most states that cover something like this. I follow the laws here for Pennsylvania and do not have a kennel, but any type of "puppy mill" would already NEED to be inspected by the PA Department of Agriculture because if you have 26+ dogs (both your own dogs as well as puppies produced) in a calendar year, you are required to be inspected and licensed. But hey, IT'S FOR THE PUPPIES so it must be good, right? lol

Interesting point to note though, this covers all animals so while I am unfamiliar with the sales of cattle, horses, pigs, etc. I would have to guess there is at least some type of online sales for them, which it would also impact.
48 posted on 05/15/2012 6:59:42 PM PDT by Gennie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: brytlea

Yes, you are exactly right, it will impact the hobby/show aka RESPONSIBLE breeder much more than it will some puppy mill who is most likely ALREADY inspected in their state. From how I understood it, if you sold puppies locally AND sold online via the internet, yep you’d need to be licensed. After I read the whole proposal again, the 4 or less exemption would only be IF you only sell from your house, you would not be exempt if you also shipped or sold in some way “sight unseen before purchase”. Where do you live that you have a breeder permit law? How awful!

49 posted on 05/15/2012 7:02:30 PM PDT by Gennie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Gennie

Palm Beach County, FL.

50 posted on 05/17/2012 11:46:35 AM PDT by brytlea (An ounce of chocolate is worth a pound of cure)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-50 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson