Proposition B: Missouri 2010
By Kerre Clark
While strolling casually around this past weekend’s annual Fall Farm Fest in Springfield, one could have gotten a taste of many things going on in the industry. One of these “things” that is buzzing around now is talk about Proposition B, which is about regulating dog breeders. On the Missouri Secretary of State’s (SOS) webpage is the proposed statute in detail. First, it states that it shall be known as the “Puppy Mill Cruelty Prevention Act.” It goes on to state that the purpose of this Act is to prohibit the cruel and inhumane treatment of dogs in puppy mills by requiring large-scale dog breeding operations to provide each dog under their care with basic food and water, adequate shelter from the elements, necessary veterinary care, adequate space to turn around and stretch his or her limbs, and regular exercise (SOS, 2010). The statute goes on the list and define in detail the meanings of the things that need to be provided and what all falls under the proposed statute. It would also only allow breeders to have no more than 50 breeding dogs at a time. These regulations are only truly necessary for those breeders or producers who do not take care of their animals. The people that care about their animals are already meeting these requirements willingly. So why the big fuss over Proposition B? Well, there are always two sides to a story that need to be heard.
On the side for voting YES on Proposition B are animal rights groups such as The Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) and many others. They are using this as part of their agenda of getting rid of animal agriculture and hunting animals for trophy or sport. Although, the organization is viewed as people rescuing dogs and cats, they have been found to only spend one half of a percent of every dollar they make to actually help the animals (MFB, 2010). In a news article on the HSUS website, they describe a TV Ad that was recently released supporting Proposition B and tells the audience that, “There are an estimated 3,000 puppy mills in Missouri which is 30 percent of all puppy mills in the nation. Proposition B will stop puppy mill abuses by enacting common-sense standards for the well being of the dogs.” They go on to say that puppy mills force dogs into small and dirty cages and are not taken care of properly (HSUS, 2010). These groups and fellow citizens want to put an end to animal cruelty and stop it at the source.
On the side for voting NO on Proposition B are animal breeders, producers which include farmers and ranchers, organizations such as Missouri Farm Bureau and many more. They see Proposition B as just a way for there to be more government regulation. Farmers and Ranchers see it as a way for in the future for their cattle, goats, sheep, horses, chickens, pigs and other animal numbers to be regulated. They fear that if this is allowed to pass that not only responsible and respectable dog breeders will be forced out of business, but that they will not be able to raise their animals because costs would be too high and fewer animals could be produced. They also see that if this statute is passed then hunting would become more regulated as well (MFB, 2010). These people are also against animal cruelty and want it stopped.
In an article found in the Missouri Farm Bureau Show Me Magazine, Jon Hagler the Director of the Missouri Department of Agriculture says that a large majority of the animal welfare problems are actually coming from a small group of people who are not part of the typical agricultural setting. Unfortunately, Mr. Hagler goes on to state, this Proposition is aimed right at the core of agriculture (MFB, 2010). It is the illegal and irresponsible breeders that have given Missouri dog breeders a bad reputation and also have people criticizing other parts of the agricultural industry as well for their animal care. This is where people need to step back and make sure that they understand what they are standing up for whether they are for or against this proposition laid out before us. We need to make sure that we are educated on the subject from all angles and tell people around us the truth.
References:
(MFB), M. F. (2010). Missourians for Animal Care Coalition Opposes. Retrieved October 4, 2010, from Missouri Farm Bureau (MFB): http://www.mofb.org/Home/Article6
Jon Hagler, Director of the Missouri Department of Agriculture. (2010, January). Director Hagler says Operation Bark Alert will do more for animal welfare. Missouri Farm Bureau Show Me Magazine .
Missouri Secretary of State (SOS). (2010). 2010 Initiative Petitions Approved for Circulation in Missouri-Statutory Amendment to Chapter 273, Relating to Dog Breeders , 1. Retrieved October 4, 2010, from Missouri Secretary of State (SOS): www.sos.mo.gov
The Humane Society of the United States (HSUS). (2010, October 4). First TV Ad Launched Urging Voters to Protect Dogs by Voting YES! on Prop B. (J. P. Paid for by Missourians for the Protection of Dogs / YES! on Prop B, Producer) Retrieved October 4, 2010, from The Humane Society of the United States (HSUS): http://www.humanesociety.org/news/press_releases/2010
No comments:
Post a Comment