Friday, July 9, 2010

PUPS: Not as warm and fuzzy as it sounds

If we don't beat this one, it's pretty much all over, folks...

For years, HSUS has been working tirelessly to introduce federal legislation which, by amending the Animal Welfare Act (AWA), would restrict the breeding of dogs and cats. Enforcement of current laws has been inefficient and ineffective, but rather than correct that situation, HSUS has used it as reason to expand upon present legislation in ways that would set a dangerous precedent by giving the federal government control over the breeding of domestic animals. No other species has such pre-breeding regulations in place, but bill proponents insist their legislation will "close a loophole" in federal law, even though the AWA was never intended to apply to in home breeders.

PUPS 2010 introduces new problematic definitions to the existing AWA, classifications which are open to reinterpretation and readjustment at any point.

Under the new definitions, a breeding female dog means in an intact female aged four months or older. Not only is a four month old dog virtually incapable of breeding, but current research finds that early spay/neuter is deleterious to the animal's health.

PUPS also creates the new definition "high volume breeder." Any breeder with "interest or custody" of one breeding female dog falls under the first test of this criteria. The second criteria includes anyone who “sells or offers for sale, via any means of conveyance (including the internet, telephone, or newspaper), more than 50 of the offspring of such breeding female dogs for use as pets in any 1-year period."

The “50 offspring” are not defined by age or as being from litters owned by the breeder or as being personally owned by the breeder. This definition will include puppies, young adults, spayed dogs, older dogs being retired from the breeding program; previously sold dogs returned and resold, dogs placed through rescue organizations, public animal control facilities, veterinarian clinics, or the internet. Furthermore, based on these new clarifications, home breeders and rescuers will be subjected to USDA licensure and its 60 plus pages of regulations.

Expanding federal regulation to this level of detail is not only unrealistic, unnecessary, excessive, and unenforceable, but will eventually lead to the "elimination of domestic species," the publicly stated goal of Wayne Pacelle, president of HSUS..

For all of these reasons and more, the Puppy Uniform Protection and Safety Act (PUPS) should be opposed in its entirety, and all of us, whether individuals or groups, who wish to preserve and protect our future with pets need to make it clearly known to our government and its representatives that PUPS is completely unacceptable.

Call or write your representatives NOW, before it's too late. Your dogs and cats are depending on you.


  1. So let me get this could co-own a bitch, not possess her and be considered a high-volume breeder based on the actions of co-owners? What is wrong with this picture!

  2. People are not going to stop wanting dogs & puppies. So the solution will be importing dogs from European puppy mills, or Mexico? Where do they think healthy pups come from? Do any of these 'get a shelter dog' types do any unbiased research AT ALL? The small breeder who actually does raise their health checked pups in the home, will be gone - I like your point that no other species is harrassed like dogs/cats are!