Dog Breeding: USDA "Crack Down" Goes Into Effect Today
  • As of today, it is no longer legal to purchase puppies over the Internet from reputable breeders. All puppy buyers must visit and pick up the puppy in person; puppies cannot be shipped or delivered to their new families.

    http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/usda-cracks-internet-pet-sales-20207528
    http://www.aphis.usda.gov/newsroom/2013/09/retail_pet_final_rule.shtml

    This is pretty bad. I don't have a link to the new regulations, but if anyone can find one, please let me know. Here are the issues I noted from the original regulations proposed in 2011. I don't know which, if any, of these have changed or been addressed:

    (1) No statute of limitations.

    It only takes one remote sale over the Internet, mail order, phone, etc to require a license. That's not one per year or one per decade; one in your entire lifetime. Presumably the sales only count after the regulations go into effect (today), but since it's not spelled out, it may be retroactive.

    (2) Definition of breeding female.

    The definition of breeding female is vague and all-encompassing. In short, it includes any animal with a uterus except fish and does not exclude animals of different species or too old/young to be bred. Nor does it specify that animals you do not own or intend to sell are excluded. It doesn't even state that you must have bred the animals yourself.

    - If you have three senior bitches 10+ years old, one brood bitch, and a female puppy -- you have five "breeding females" and must be licensed, despite the fact that only one of the dogs is actually breedable.

    - If you have four female parakeets and one brood bitch -- you have five "breeding females" and must be licensed, despite the fact that they are different species and you don't breed birds.

    - If you have one brood bitch who gives birth to a litter with four females -- you have five "breeding females" and must be licensed, despite the fact that you intend to place all three puppies.

    - If you are fostering a litter of puppies for a rescue which includes five females -- you have five "breeding females" and must be licensed, despite the fact that you didn't breed the litter and they're too young to be spayed/neutered.

    - If you have three brood bitches and co-own two brood bitches with someone else -- you have five "breeding females" and must be licensed, despite the fact that the co-owned bitches don't live with you. The co-owned dogs are counted against each other owner as well.

    (3) Definition of sight-unseen.

    A license is required if a sale is made sight-unseen. The definition of sight-unseen does not allow for any kind of photography or live/recorded video of the animal, delivery, nor any third party pickup. The animal must be seen in person by the buyer at the seller's premises.

    - If you deliver the puppy to the buyer in person instead of at your home -- it is "sight-unseen" and you must be licensed.

    - If the buyer's sister comes to your house to pick up the puppy -- it is "sight-unseen" and you must be licensed.

    - If you ship the puppy after taking hundreds of photos of the puppies, your home, and the parents -- it is "sight-unseen" and you must be licensed.

    - If you ship the puppy after having a live video stream of the puppies up 24/7 for two months -- it is "sight-unseen" and you must be licensed.

    (4) No choice for the buyer.

    The buyer does not have the choice to have his puppy shipped to him. Even one sale that doesn't occur on the seller's premises would force the seller to need a license. Reputable breeders cannot be licensed (see below) and therefor cannot sell to anyone that does not pick up the puppy at their home. The buyer does not have the option to waive the requirement that he see the puppy and premises in person. Even if the buyer purchased a puppy in person from the seller in the past, he must again travel to the seller's home and see the puppy and its living conditions in person for the new transaction.

    The entire mess could be solved if the breeder was only required to make his premises available and let the buyer choose to visit in person or not.

    (5) Reputable breeders cannot be licensed.

    The environment described and required by a USDA license is not only unfeasible and expensive for a homeowner, but it produces subpar conditions for the puppies you are raising.

    One of many problems with being USDA licensed is that all surfaces must be impervious. That means you can't raise your pups in your house or let your dogs sleep in your bed or sit on the couch with you at night. Being USDA inspected is impossible for small breeders living in a neighborhood. It means [...] your breeder has to turn their breeding program into a sterile environment non-conducive to the best possible conditions for the animals.
    「怪獣荘秋田犬」Kaiju Kennels Japanese Akita and Hokkaido, Claire Matthews
    http://www.facebook.com/PoetikDragon
    http://www.facebook.com/KaijuKennels
    http://www.kaijukennels.com
    Post edited by PoetikDragon at 2013-09-10 14:34:12
  • mdokicmdokic
    Posts: 1020
    Holy cow, that's intense...it's for a great cause (lord knows how horrible puppy mills are), but it has to make things difficult for all other breeders who (I guess by reading the article) have 4+ "breeding females". O_o
    Michelle, with Kai girls Kona and Kimber
    DSC_6037_NEW_banner
  • Thanks, I will adjust my above post accordingly. I was off by 1.
    「怪獣荘秋田犬」Kaiju Kennels Japanese Akita and Hokkaido, Claire Matthews
    http://www.facebook.com/PoetikDragon
    http://www.facebook.com/KaijuKennels
    http://www.kaijukennels.com
  • CaliaCalia
    Posts: 3975
    Even though I'm not a breeder, but if I were I wouldn't mind following these rules if they actually accomplished what they were created to do, which is to fight bad breeders/mills. Problem is is that all they are losing is the profit of one out of the hundreds or thousands of puppies they sell each year. They'll just get this extra permit and take the minor hit, still making a decent profit off of the animals they abuse.
    image
  • I would follow the regulations and get a license, if it were possible. However, the dogs cannot be pets; they must live in sterile cages with no porous surfaces and cannot come into the house. They must be housed in separate buildings -- one for intact animals and one for sick/pregnant/nursing mothers.

    I refuse to turn my dogs into livestock.
    「怪獣荘秋田犬」Kaiju Kennels Japanese Akita and Hokkaido, Claire Matthews
    http://www.facebook.com/PoetikDragon
    http://www.facebook.com/KaijuKennels
    http://www.kaijukennels.com
    Post edited by PoetikDragon at 2013-09-10 14:18:07
  • CaliaCalia
    Posts: 3975
    "Also exempt are the following: people who breed and sell working dogs;"

    This statement also makes me wonder what they use to define a "working dog" and how many kennels will try to use that to their advantage.
    image
  • Yeah, I saw that part -- I'm very interested in that little gem. Not all puppies are qualified for work, no matter how good the parents' are at that job. You may have one good hunting prospect or police dog in a litter, right? And what if a litter is born with no good prospects? I want to know how many "working" dogs you have to produce. I assume service animals count. What about therapy dogs? Many ideas...

    I have some options with my Akitas. I feel bad for the reputable breeders of companion/toy breeds who can't easily just start having their animals do some kind of work.
    「怪獣荘秋田犬」Kaiju Kennels Japanese Akita and Hokkaido, Claire Matthews
    http://www.facebook.com/PoetikDragon
    http://www.facebook.com/KaijuKennels
    http://www.kaijukennels.com
    Post edited by PoetikDragon at 2013-09-10 14:22:40
  • CaliaCalia
    Posts: 3975
    I would follow the regulations and get a license, if it were possible. However, the dogs cannot be pets; they must live in sterile cages with no porous surfaces and cannot come into the house. They must be housed in separate buildings -- one for intact animals and one for sick/pregnant/nursing mothers.

    I refuse to turn my dogs into livestock.


    But from the sounds of it, that would only apply to dogs being sold to buyers that haven't visited the breeder or are getting the pups shipped. If you require that all buyers pick up their pups from your home, which some breeders already follow, then it won't affect you much.

    I'm not saying that I support it, just that it can be done. Either way, these restrictions do nothing to solve the problem of bad breeders.
    image
  • ttddinhttddinh
    Posts: 1990
    This sucks.
  • CrispyCrispy
    Posts: 1825
    Will this have impact on importing dogs?
    Akiyama no Roushya || 秋山の狼室 || www.kishu-ken.org
  • sunyatasunyata
    Posts: 4535
    I am curious to know what would happen if a buyer visited the premises when the pups were 4 weeks old, but wanted to have the dog shipped when he or she was 8 weeks old...

    Either way, I appreciate the sentiment behind the new regulations, but the logistics of it and the implications for responsible breeders is a nightmare.
    Bella 2Mountains 2Nola 2
    Casey, with Bella and Nola, hanging out in the mountains of Virginia.
  • lindsaytlindsayt
    Posts: 3432
    I thought hobby breeders were exempt? This won't affect people selling locally only, but it sure could make this hard for those of us in remote areas with rare breeds being sold out of state. Seriously tho, who is going to be enforcing and researching all of this on a 1 to 1 basis? As long as you don't have a paypal button on your site, who would know how many, where or to whom you sold puppies unless you volunteer yourself?
    info@hokkaidoken.org
    www.hokkaidoken.com
    www.hokkaidousa.wordpress.com
  • lindsaytlindsayt
    Posts: 3432
    And how do "they" determine who needs to be licensed (I mean, I see the rules, but does somebody browse web pages all day, or look up x breed for x state breeders to see how they sell? So can small breeders avoid being "caught" up with the large scale commercial breeders?
    info@hokkaidoken.org
    www.hokkaidoken.com
    www.hokkaidousa.wordpress.com
  • @Calia In the three years which I've been receiving inquiries about litters, I have had only a handful willing and able to travel to me. Of course, I could turn away everyone who will not travel; but I love my puppy buyers who didn't come out in person like @ThreeFish231118 and would hate to have turned her away and never had this relationship and great home for Kyuubi.

    Limiting my puppy buyers to those who can travel to me will do one of two things (a) only rich people who can afford the two-grand round trip get puppies or (b) flood the So Cal area with more Japanese Akitas it doesn't need while leaving the rest of the country bereft. I think (a) is a little unlikely, because if they can afford it, then they could also just import from Japan. I find (b) unpalatable because part of my goals as a breeder and member of Japanese Akita Club of America is to promote the breed and increase its population in the US -- not in California, but nationwide.

    I wont produce a litter without homes already lines up for a reasonable number of possible puppies. I typically want about ten solid people I feel have a good chance of getting what they want in this litter and whom I'd like to do further interviews and discussions to determine if they're a good fit. Now trying to find good ten homes that are all willing to travel, all at the same time, is next to impossible for me. People are added and removed to my list all the time; I may have eight good prospects on the list, but while finding another two or waiting for a bitch to come into season again so she can be bred, three people drop off. Plus, not only would I be turning away great homes like @ThreeFish231118 but I'd have to lower my acceptance criteria to have a large enough group of stand-by people.

    And don't get me started on how unpopular brindles are compared to reds. If the "working dog" loop hole doesn't work out, I don't think I'll breed brindles again. I'd never have enough people waiting for one and willing to travel that I'd be comfortable producing a litter. Placing four was difficult enough, and only one person flew out to pick up.
    「怪獣荘秋田犬」Kaiju Kennels Japanese Akita and Hokkaido, Claire Matthews
    http://www.facebook.com/PoetikDragon
    http://www.facebook.com/KaijuKennels
    http://www.kaijukennels.com
  • MirkaMMirkaM
    Posts: 1248
    How about exporting dogs?
    Kai will lay down its life to protect its master.
    photo banneri_zpsc6e1d74e.jpg
    Kennel Gekkoo No: http://gekkoonoen.webs.com/index.htm
  • @lindsayt It's completely unenforceable. They simply don't have the budgeting to do it nor the staff for all the inspections. So yes, people can avoid getting caught breaking the rules relatively easily.

    Not that I support such a thing. [If I was a D&D character, I'd be lawful neutral.]
    「怪獣荘秋田犬」Kaiju Kennels Japanese Akita and Hokkaido, Claire Matthews
    http://www.facebook.com/PoetikDragon
    http://www.facebook.com/KaijuKennels
    http://www.kaijukennels.com
    Post edited by PoetikDragon at 2013-09-10 15:08:26
  • lindsaytlindsayt
    Posts: 3432
    Well, "working" seems to be a pretty loose definition these days, so why not?
    info@hokkaidoken.org
    www.hokkaidoken.com
    www.hokkaidousa.wordpress.com
  • Is there a link to the exact regulation?
    www.akita-inu.com
    www.Japanese-Akitas.com
    pedigrees.akita-inu.com
  • There was also a line talking about preserving a bloodline. I would think that the rare breeds could fall under that. I am in the same boat, if I only sold to people that came and picked up their puppies, I would have lost out on 2 incredible puppy homes. Toshi would not be in Cali and Keira would not be in TX. Both puppies are in very loving homes and were perfect fits for their families.
    Stacey living with Tora, Kazue, Ritsu and Kuma the Shiba
    www.suteishiikennels.com

    DSCF0686IMG_0940 - Version 2DSCF0714IMG_1151

    10443860_10202258803333634_2133731540_n
  • a couple websites define breeding female as intact and 4 months old min age.
    www.akita-inu.com
    www.Japanese-Akitas.com
    pedigrees.akita-inu.com
  • SayaSaya
    Posts: 3013
    Comments on this is sad. :(

    Just my humble opinion but after working the Atkisson puppy mill raid in 1998 (700+ dogs in conditions beyond human understanding) and running a small animal rescue operation for the past 25 years I believe that in order to own a female unspayed dog or cat you should have to pay a 150.00 a year fee per animal. The money should go to no kill animal shelters and low cost spay and neuter clinics, not in the pockets of local politicians


    Wow. Crazy person. :(

    I mean aren't dogs who are not spayed or neuter have to pay more anyways with the whole dog license thing?

    This is sad. Does nothing, but punish reputable breeders as bad ones will still make money as people still don't care where they get their lab or shiba..

    I'm talking about average joe..

    Shut down every pet store and make it illegal to treat dogs like livestock!
    Photobucket
    Nicole, 7year old Bella(Boxer), and 7year old Saya(Shiba inu)
  • What I want to see is a new department that is organized around the concept that reputable breeders have their animals in their homes as pets and companions. They can still do inspections, but instead of a pass/fail license, a grading system like you see at restaurants would be nice. Let the grades include more than just the home environment; get bonus points for other things such as having pedigrees, titles, health clearances, breed club membership, sales contracts, etc. I would be happy to comply with and proudly display my own ethical breeder certification.

    A pass/fail inspection for a license given by an agency focused on livestock and food? What's the point...
    「怪獣荘秋田犬」Kaiju Kennels Japanese Akita and Hokkaido, Claire Matthews
    http://www.facebook.com/PoetikDragon
    http://www.facebook.com/KaijuKennels
    http://www.kaijukennels.com
    Post edited by PoetikDragon at 2013-09-10 16:19:07
  • mdokicmdokic
    Posts: 1020
    Holy cow i just read some of the comments on the abcnews article...people never cease to amaze me at just how STUPID and UNINFORMED they can be. Everyone who responds to them is quite literally wasting their time.. *yuck*
    Michelle, with Kai girls Kona and Kimber
    DSC_6037_NEW_banner
  • omgtainomgtain
    Posts: 240
    How would this be enforced ? Would they just prevent airlines from shipping puppies ?
    image

    Tain, Nare the GSD/Husky, and Tavi the Kaigirl!
  • UKC took this very seriously and wrote the following letter last year. Apparently it went unheeded (along with the letter from AKC which I remember reading but don't have off hand).

    http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=APHIS-2011-0003-15063

    UNITED UNITED KENNEL CLUB KENNEL CLUB
    Your Total Dog Registry Since 1898

    Through this letter, United Kennel Club respectfully submits its comments on for the Proposed Rule put forth by the United States Department of Agriculture Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) on May 16, 2012. 77 Fed. Reg. 28799 (May 16, 2012).

    Established in 1898, the United Kennel Club is the largest all-breed performance-dog registry in the world, registering dogs from all 50 states and 25 foreign countries. More than 60 percent of its 15,000 annually licensed events are tests of hunting ability, training and instinct. UKC prides itself on its family-oriented, friendly, educational events. UKC also seeks to protect and preserve the rights of its breeders to continue to produce healthy, happy, and well-rounded purebred dogs.

    UKC has several concerns with the Proposed Rule and is apprehensive about the detrimental effect on responsible breeders. The main thrust of the change is to close the 'loophole' created by internet sales by narrowing the current retail pet store exemption that the majority of hobby breeders fall into. The internet sales of dogs themselves are not the issue. While internet sales help to foster an environment of ignorance for puppy buyers, the issue itself is the condition that dogs are kept in by unscrupulous breeders, not the fact that dogs are sold 'sight unseen.' Selling animals 'sight unseen' is nothing new and certainly nothing unique to the age of the internet. Animals have been sold via advertisements and other methods for centuries. In addition, many other instances of selling 'sight unseen' occur every day in the world of purebred dogs that have no maleficent implications: the buyer may already be familiar with the bloodlines, may be a previous customer, the dog may be transported to a show, or it may be a rare breed where breeders are few and far between and visiting the kennel is not realistic or feasible.

    Implementation of the Proposed Rule could result in many responsible breeders significantly reducing their operations and stopping all 'sight unseen' sales in order to avoid licensing or many may simply stop breeding altogether. This will in turn funnel more pet buyers to the abusers and create more business for the breeders who are the concern of the rule change. It's quite clear that APHIS has vastly underestimated the amount of new breeders the overly broad definition will bring in as they have speculated only 1,500 'new' retail breeders. The number of dog breeders alone would be well beyond that estimate, but the fact that several species are included makes the estimate unrealistically low.

    Not only is the requirement that buyers physically enter the premises to purchase an animal overly broad and overinclusive, but many terms are disconcertingly unclear as well. While UKC agrees with the decision to increase the exemption threshold from 3 to 4 "breeding females," 4 or less "breeding females" is not further defined. Many breeders may have more female animals than they actually use for breeding; it's quite common in show and performance kennels to retain dogs and see how they mature and progress, often for years, before deciding whether they are worthy of breeding or not. The proposed regulations would harm responsible breeding practices if breeders feel constrained in the number of females they may keep. No age is set for breeding females, so it could include anything from young puppies to old retired females. At a minimum, this definition would need clarification and exemptions for females not actively being used for breeding so as not to hinder responsible breeders. The exemption for "dogs used for hunting, security, or breeding purposes" is also vague. Many legitimate kennels sell dogs for several purposes; they may sell dogs for hunting purposes AND as pets. It's unclear as to whether dogs must be sold exclusively for "hunting, security, or breeding purposes" in order to meet the exception, or if selling some as pets would be acceptable as well.

    While most state and local anti-cruelty laws are more than sufficient to address the conditions that APHIS is concerned with, should APHIS proceed with the proposed regulations, UKC respectfully requests that clarifications and amendments be made. The definition of the targeted group must be more narrowly tailored, as including any pet seller who makes one sale "sight unseen" is too broad and will do more harm to responsible breeders than the good it may do in curtailing the bad actors. In this state of economic affairs, USDA will not have the resources nor manpower to inspect and license the great number of breeders that will fall under the proposed regulations. UKC cannot support the Proposed Rule as currently written, and asks that APHIS consider alternatives to narrow the scope in order to better reach the intended target.

    Sara Chisnell-Voigt
    Legal Counsel
    United Kennel Club, Inc.
    「怪獣荘秋田犬」Kaiju Kennels Japanese Akita and Hokkaido, Claire Matthews
    http://www.facebook.com/PoetikDragon
    http://www.facebook.com/KaijuKennels
    http://www.kaijukennels.com
    Post edited by PoetikDragon at 2013-09-10 17:04:38
  • Ok found it: This is from the Feb 27, 2013 draft:

    Breeding female: ‘(1) DEFINITIONS- In this subsection:

    ‘(A) BREEDING FEMALE DOG- The term ‘breeding female dog’ means an intact female dog aged 4 months or older.

    ‘(B) HIGH VOLUME RETAIL BREEDER- The term ‘high volume retail breeder’ means a person who, in commerce, for compensation or profit--

    ‘(i) has an ownership interest in or custody of 1 or more breeding female dogs; and

    ‘(ii) 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.

    I don't know if this is the final version.

    www.akita-inu.com
    www.Japanese-Akitas.com
    pedigrees.akita-inu.com
  • That's a different thing. That looks like H.R. 835 Puppy Uniform Protection and Safety Act (PUPS Act). Here is the AKC letter of opposition to PUPS. The act failed and was not reintroduced BTW.

    http://www.akc.org/governmentrelations/documents/pdf/PUPSAct1-26-12.pdf

    To my knowledge, breeding female has not been satisfactorily defined in any version of the USDA regulations.
    「怪獣荘秋田犬」Kaiju Kennels Japanese Akita and Hokkaido, Claire Matthews
    http://www.facebook.com/PoetikDragon
    http://www.facebook.com/KaijuKennels
    http://www.kaijukennels.com
    Post edited by PoetikDragon at 2013-09-10 17:55:37
  • Post edited by *JackBurton* at 2013-09-10 18:58:18
  • cdenneycdenney
    Posts: 961
    Sorry I get puppy mills are sick business but who the hell is breeding females at 4 months or 6 when they first come into heat? They're still developing! Did the usda really get that age from history or just pulled one out of their ass!

    I appreciate the sentiment of the law but it is unfeasible for home breeders!
    image
    image
    Post edited by cdenney at 2013-09-10 19:32:40
  • aykayk
    Posts: 1979
    Stinks.

    From today's APHIS press release, the 4 breedable female rule includes dogs, cats or small exotic/wild pocket pets.

    With a caveat, " Breeders who maintain four or fewer breeding females are considered hobby breeders who already provide sufficient care to their animals without APHIS’ oversight – provided they only sell the offspring of animals born and raised on their premises for pets or exhibition."
    Post edited by ayk at 2013-09-10 19:33:52
  • Breeding female: per the PDF "female?
    A. Only female animals with the capacity to breed are considered “breeding females.” Females that an APHIS inspector decides cannot breed due to age, infirmity, illness, or other issues are not considered “breeding females.”

    More importantly "Q: How will USDA identify breeders who may need to be regulated?
    A: APHIS will use various methods to access publicly- available information to identify and inform those individuals who may need an AWA commercial breeding license. These methods include evaluating customer complaints against breeders and Internet retailers, as well as reviewing the marketing and promotional materials of breeders and Internet retailers. In addition, we will review public information available online to identify sellers that potentially meet the definition of commercial breeder in the AWA. By viewing publicly available information, APHIS can educate individuals about the AWA, and if needed, assist them with obtaining licenses. This will ensure that all animals that should be covered by the AWA will receive humane care and treatment.

    It looks like they will focus on online retailers. Complaints seem to be the major mechanism for enforcement.
    www.akita-inu.com
    www.Japanese-Akitas.com
    pedigrees.akita-inu.com
    Post edited by *JackBurton* at 2013-09-10 19:44:17
  • aykayk
    Posts: 1979
    So if someone like a certain computer programmer here were to import a pup and then "resell" (Hana? Sachi? Kaiju? Nami? Kitora? Kilbo? Tyson?), this "4 female" exemption would not apply. Someone like him would need to get a license and open himself up to inspection.

    The thing with licensing and inspections is that you can't count on a neutral inspector. With the USDA undermanned as they are, they're outsource to volunteer groups like HSUS and activists. ie. people who are leading the mindset that there's no such thing as a responsible breeder.



    Post edited by ayk at 2013-09-10 20:44:41
  • Honestly I don't know. I'm going to read this in detail tonight.
    www.akita-inu.com
    www.Japanese-Akitas.com
    pedigrees.akita-inu.com
  • cdenneycdenney
    Posts: 961
    If it's largely internet based would a solution to have an adoption fee that covers the care the animal has recieved for x amount of time? At least your site wouldn't be flagged for selling pups. Just adoptions
    image
    image
  • aykayk
    Posts: 1979
    No matter if you use the term "sell" or "adopt", the face-to-face rule still applies for folks who are not under government jurisdiction (ie. state, county, city, and contract shelters).



    http://www.aphis.usda.gov/newsroom/2013/09/pdf/faq_retail_pets_final_rule.pdf



    RESCUE GROUPS AND POUNDS

    Q. How will the final rule affect rescue groups that
    participate in off-site adoption events?

    A. People who engage in face-to-face transactions at
    a place other than their premises, which include offsite
    adoption events, are considered to be subject to
    public oversight. As a result, they do not need to
    obtain a license.


    Q. What does the final rule mean for State, county,
    or city owned and operated pounds, and shelters,
    as well as humane societies and other
    organizations that operate under a contract with
    those jurisdictions?

    A. The f nal rule has no effect on these entities.
    These agencies and organizations are not regulated
    under the AWA as long as all of their activities are
    under the jurisdiction of the municipality, township, city,
    county, or state and do not fall under APHIS
    regulation.
  • I'm highlighting the important bits...

    Q. Under the final rule, what is the new definition of a retail pet store?

    A. In the final rule, "retail pet store" means a place of business or residence at which the seller, buyer, and the animal available for sale are physically present so that every buyer may personally observe the animal prior to purchasing and/or taking custody of it after purchase. By personally observing the animal, the buyer is exercising public oversight over the animal and in this way is helping to ensure its health and humane treatment. Retailers who sell their pet animals to customers in face-to-face transactions do not have to obtain an AWA license because their animals are subject to such public oversight.


    Okay, so the buyer, seller, and animal have to be present at the retail location (breeder's home). Got it.

    Q. Do sellers who breed pets at their residences have to allow buyers into their homes in order to be considered a retail pet store?

    A. No. The regulation allows for sales to take place at any location agreed upon by the seller and the buyer. This could be a home but it could also be another mutually agreeable location.


    ... What? Conflicting answer. :/

    Also, how does agreeing to meet off site (if it really is allowed) ensure the animal's living conditions at the retail location are humane and subject to public oversight?

    Q. If a person cannot personally observe an animal before buying it, can someone else stand in?

    A. Yes. Some commenters to our proposed rule noted that it would be difficult for certain people—for instance, foreign, disabled, or elderly customers—to personally observe the animals they wish to buy. We consider the buyer of a pet animal sold at retail to be the person who takes custody of the animal after purchase, even if this person is not the ultimate owner of the animal. This person cannot, however, be a commercial transporter or intermediate handler.


    Okay, so I just need some local friend to "buy" the dogs and take them from my home for transport to their real owners. Uhm, okay... Wait, what was the point again?

    Isn't anyone who takes the dog from the breeder to the new owner an intermediate handler? They don't define it...

    Q. Under the final rule, what constitutes a breeding female?

    A. Only female animals with the capacity to breed are considered "breeding females." Females that an APHIS inspector decides cannot breed due to age, infirmity, illness, or other issues are not considered "breeding females."


    Read: All intact females are breeding females unless the inspector is in a good mood. There are no rules for it, only whatever the inspector decides. If you get to the point of needing inspection, they've already decided you need a license...

    Q. Does this final rule bring working dogs sold at retail under regulation?

    A. Working dogs are generally understood to be dogs that are not sold for use as pets but for purposes such as hunting, breeding, and security. Dogs sold at retail for these purposes do not come under regulation under the AWA.


    It doesn't address "dual purpose" dogs which are both working dogs and companions. It does not seem to include service, therapy, or performance as working dogs.

    Q. Will APHIS require working dog breeders to be regulated if they occasionally sell an animal as a pet that has proved unsuitable as a working dog due to birth defects, poor temperament, or other flaws?

    A. Individuals who intend to breed and sell dogs at retail as working dogs may occasionally raise a dog that lacks the characteristics that would enable it to be sold or used for its intended working purpose. As long as the individual originally intended to raise and sell the dog at retail for that purpose and the individual continues to market his or her dogs for that purpose, the individual could sell the individual dog at retail without needing to be regulated by APHIS.


    Oh joy, we're regulating intent now. This doesn't make things muddy at all!

    Q. Will regulated breeders who keep their dogs in their homes have to put them in a kennel?

    A. Generally not. The AWA regulations define a "primary enclosure" to mean any structure or device used to restrict animals to a limited amount of space—which means that a home can be considered a dog’s primary enclosure. If a room of a house is used as a dog’s primary enclosure (for instance, a whelping room or nursery), AWA regulations and standards apply to that room.

    However, if a dog breeder allows his or her dogs to have free run of the entire house, we have to determine whether the home can house the animals within AWA standards. If the breeder has a kennel or cages that the dogs can stay in inside the home that meet AWA standards, the breeder has satisfi ed the primary enclosure requirements. A number of currently licensed wholesale breeders maintain their animals in their homes.


    This is good news at least.

    Q: How will USDA identify breeders who may need to be regulated?

    A: APHIS will use various methods to access publicly available information to identify and inform those individuals who may need an AWA commercial breeding license. These methods include evaluating customer complaints against breeders and Internet retailers, as well as reviewing the marketing and promotional materials of breeders and Internet retailers. In addition, we will review public information available online to identify sellers that potentially meet the definition of commercial breeder in the AWA. By viewing publicly available information, APHIS can educate individuals about the AWA, and if needed, assist them with obtaining licenses. This will ensure that all animals that should be covered by the AWA will receive humane care and treatment.


    Big Brother is watching your Facebook page. *snicker* But in all seriousness, posts and discussions on this forum may become a liability for the breeders. Even things like forum signatures -- mine looks like I have more than 4 dogs for example.
    「怪獣荘秋田犬」Kaiju Kennels Japanese Akita and Hokkaido, Claire Matthews
    http://www.facebook.com/PoetikDragon
    http://www.facebook.com/KaijuKennels
    http://www.kaijukennels.com
    Post edited by PoetikDragon at 2013-09-10 20:57:24
  • So if someone like a certain computer programmer here were to import a pup and then "resell" (Hana? Sachi? Kaiju? Nami? Kitora? Kilbo? Tyson?), this "4 female" exemption would not apply. Someone like him would need to get a license and open himself up to inspection.

    The thing with licensing and inspections is that you can't count on a neutral inspector. With the USDA undermanned as they are, they're outsource to volunteer groups like HSUS and activists. ie. people who are leading the mindset that there's no such thing as a responsible breeder.



    And reading this, I think you've really captured something in the last paragraph that I was thinking about as I read these laws. The law is the USDA being caught between two large special interest groups with lots of money: HSUS who are agains any breeders, and the interests of the commercial breeder who doesn't want anything to interrupt the bottom ($) line. so they end up with laws like this, that don't fix the problems with problem breeders, but do cause problems for good (hobby) breeders. Granted, the USDA has never had any interest in really preventing abuse in commercial breeders--they're just regulating livestock. :(

    Offtopic, but...@PoeticDragon....people don't want brindles??!! Hard to believe! I'd love a brindle, but have kind of given up on getting a brindle AA because they end up going to show homes.....Of course, I've also never really got a choice on color on dogs I've bought....the breeder always has picked the dog for me.

    Lisa, Toby (Shiba), Oskar and Zora (American Akita), and Leo (Kai Ken)
  • Excerpts from the main doc (it's long but I'm making my way through it!)

    A seller who sells over the Internet could still be considered a retail pet store provided that, before the buyer takes custody of the animals purchased, the seller, buyer, and animals have been physically present in one location so that the buyer may personally observe the animals.


    A number of commenters suggested that, if the term “total” is meant in a partitive sense (i.e., four or fewer breeding female dogs, four or fewer breeding female cats, four or fewer breeding female small exotic or wild mammals), the sentence should be amended to make this clear.

    The exemption refers to the aggregate number of female dogs, cats, and/or small exotic or wild mammals on the premises who are bred and whose offspring are sold as pets.


    If the breeding females [which are retired and sold to a pet home] were not born and raised on the premises, the seller does not qualify for this exemption regardless of the number of breeding females they maintain.

    「怪獣荘秋田犬」Kaiju Kennels Japanese Akita and Hokkaido, Claire Matthews
    http://www.facebook.com/PoetikDragon
    http://www.facebook.com/KaijuKennels
    http://www.kaijukennels.com
    Post edited by PoetikDragon at 2013-09-10 23:47:41
  • aykayk
    Posts: 1979
    Just a heads-up that the CFA warns that the USDA releases and conference call summaries should not be relied upon. (Historically, the USDA has not been clear.)

    The final 91 page docket (to be released later this week) is what should be looked at.

    Post edited by ayk at 2013-09-11 00:04:00
  • @ayk The document I am quoting in the last post is 91 pages exactly, so I am assuming its the same one.
    「怪獣荘秋田犬」Kaiju Kennels Japanese Akita and Hokkaido, Claire Matthews
    http://www.facebook.com/PoetikDragon
    http://www.facebook.com/KaijuKennels
    http://www.kaijukennels.com
    Post edited by PoetikDragon at 2013-09-11 00:11:24
  • aykayk
    Posts: 1979
    Strange. It looks like an official doc, but I wonder why several notable sources are saying "later this week".

    Reading the 91 pages now.

  • Another interesting excerpt:

    The OIG audit had heavily redacted statements made by former Secretary of Agriculture Ann Veneman in DDAL v. Veneman in order to suggest that Internet sellers need to be licensed. The commenter provided Secretary Veneman’s full transcript, which stated that oversight is necessary but is already being exercised by breed and registry organizations. The commenter concluded that APHIS had either taken these statements in the report out of context or relied on statements that were taken out of context in order to justify the proposed rule, and that this was tantamount to legal dishonesty.
    「怪獣荘秋田犬」Kaiju Kennels Japanese Akita and Hokkaido, Claire Matthews
    http://www.facebook.com/PoetikDragon
    http://www.facebook.com/KaijuKennels
    http://www.kaijukennels.com
    Post edited by PoetikDragon at 2013-09-11 00:49:21
  • aykayk
    Posts: 1979
    Ugh. Read through the 91 pages.

    So the key seems to be 3 groups of labels:

    1. "Dealer"

    “Any person who, in commerce, for compensation or profit, delivers for transportation, or transports, except as a carrier, buys, sells, or negotiates the purchase or sale of: Any dog or other animal whether alive or dead (including unborn animals, organs, limbs, blood, serum, or other parts) for research, teaching, testing, experimentation, exhibition, or for use as a pet, or any dog at the wholesale level for hunting, security, or breeding purposes. This term does not include: A retail pet store, as defined in this section; any retail outlet where dogs are sold for hunting, breeding, or security purposes; or any person who does not sell or negotiate the purchase or sale of any wild or exotic animal, dog, or cat and who derives no more than $500 gross income from the sale of the animals other than wild or exotic animals, dogs, or cats during any calendar year.”


    So if I were to adopt out a rescue dog (neutered pet), I would be defined as a dealer. If I were to re-home a potential breeding dog that I purchased into a pet home, I would be defined as a dealer. If I were to re-home a dog that I purchased into a show home (exhibition), I would be defined as a dealer? If I were a wholesaler (big mill), I would be a dealer if I sold a dog as a breeding dog.

    However, as a retailer, if I were to re-home a dog that I purchased into a breeding home, the new rules wouldn't apply?

    2. "Retail Pet Store"

    We proposed to revise the definition of retail pet store so that it would mean “a place of business or residence that each buyer physically enters in order to personally observe the animals available for sale prior to purchase and/or to take custody of the animals after purchase, and where only the following animals are sold or offered for sale, at retail, for use as pets: Dogs, cats, rabbits, guinea pigs, hamsters, gerbils, rats, mice, gophers, chinchillas, domestic ferrets, domestic farm animals, birds, and coldblooded species.”


    The key word here is "pets" being sold. Not future breeding dogs but pets. Consider though that the discussion says that dogs bred for agility are considered pets and so agility breeders would be classified as "Retail Pet Stores."


    3. Not dealer, not retail pet store.

    Key to understanding this, I think, is on pg. 24-25.

    A person who sells and ships animals at retail for breeding purposes is not considered a dealer and thus not subject to licensing. Such persons could continue selling at retail and shipping animals sight unseen as long as the animal is used for breeding purposes and not for any of the six purposes listed under the definition of dealer in §1.1.



    Post edited by ayk at 2013-09-11 02:03:38
  • Having read the entire 91 pages (phew!) my statements in the original post still stand.

    I was hopeful, but the "breeding and working dog exemption" does not seem to apply -- in fact if I read it correctly it is almost impossible to get the breeding/working dog exemption. It clearly states that if a seller sells dogs for multiple purposes, and any of those purposes are for pet or exhibition, that he is not eligible for the exemption. Even one pet or show dog sale would require licensing. Moreover, it does not allow for individual dogs which have multiple purposes; that is to say, because most breeding/working dogs are ALSO pets, they count as pet sales. Only working dogs which live out their lives as livestock and "equipment", never to see a house or know human companionship, are exempt. Even then, some of those dogs may not qualify, if they are used for exhibition.

    That the document states the buyer is not necessarily the owner, but is the person who picks up the dog from the seller. Therefor, a proxy or intermediary can complete the face-to-face transaction and allow the seller to remain exempt. However, in the next "breath" it goes on to say that carriers and intermediary handlers do not qualify. It does not explain what an "intermediary handler" is, but I cannot think of what any proxy would be BUT an "intermediary handler."

    I had a bunch of other complaints about it while talking it over with my husband, but the highlights have been hit.
    「怪獣荘秋田犬」Kaiju Kennels Japanese Akita and Hokkaido, Claire Matthews
    http://www.facebook.com/PoetikDragon
    http://www.facebook.com/KaijuKennels
    http://www.kaijukennels.com
  • A. Working dogs are generally understood to be dogs that are not sold for use as pets but for purposes such as hunting, breeding, and security. Dogs sold at retail for these purposes do not come under regulation under the AWA.

    Unless I'm missing something, seems like an easy out for puppy millers to classify their dogs' work as "breeding" and never require their puppies be neutered.
  • aykayk
    Posts: 1979
    On FB, that's what being interpreted. The wholesalers are still captured, but the ones that fit the "Retail Pet Store" would have that out.

    ie. Don't sell any dogs on spay/neuter pet contracts because then the licensing requirement kicks in if you sell both exempt and non-exempt dogs on the premise. Sell all as breeding dogs.
    Post edited by ayk at 2013-09-11 02:13:43
  • But if the breeding dog is also a pet (ie. you are selling to real people not other puppy mills) it is a non-exempt sale.
    「怪獣荘秋田犬」Kaiju Kennels Japanese Akita and Hokkaido, Claire Matthews
    http://www.facebook.com/PoetikDragon
    http://www.facebook.com/KaijuKennels
    http://www.kaijukennels.com
  • aykayk
    Posts: 1979
    I don't see the exclusivity or hierarchy spelled out when it comes to the label of breeding dog vs. pet.

  • I do find this document to be really hard to digest. Honestly, I really feel that none of us are qualified to interrupt these rules. While I do feel that the four intact female rule is the key to this... I am even hesitant to suggest it.

    My gut tells me that this is aimed at websites like Petfind and etc. I'm hoping that a larger breed organization will pay for an attorney that specializes in this stuff to weigh in on the subject.
    www.akita-inu.com
    www.Japanese-Akitas.com
    pedigrees.akita-inu.com
    Post edited by *JackBurton* at 2013-09-11 11:40:53
  • Having read the entire 91 pages (phew!) my statements in the original post still stand.

    I was hopeful, but the "breeding and working dog exemption" does not seem to apply -- in fact if I read it correctly it is almost impossible to get the breeding/working dog exemption. It clearly states that if a seller sells dogs for multiple purposes, and any of those purposes are for pet or exhibition, that he is not eligible for the exemption. Even one pet or show dog sale would require licensing. Moreover, it does not allow for individual dogs which have multiple purposes; that is to say, because most breeding/working dogs are ALSO pets, they count as pet sales. Only working dogs which live out their lives as livestock and "equipment", never to see a house or know human companionship, are exempt. Even then, some of those dogs may not qualify, if they are used for exhibition.

    That the document states the buyer is not necessarily the owner, but is the person who picks up the dog from the seller. Therefor, a proxy or intermediary can complete the face-to-face transaction and allow the seller to remain exempt. However, in the next "breath" it goes on to say that carriers and intermediary handlers do not qualify. It does not explain what an "intermediary handler" is, but I cannot think of what any proxy would be BUT an "intermediary handler."

    I had a bunch of other complaints about it while talking it over with my husband, but the highlights have been hit.


    Did you notice this in the factsheet?

    Under our previous regulations, we considered
    breeders who owned up to three breeding females
    (dogs, cats, or small exotic or wild mammals) to be
    hobby breeders, who provide sufficient care to their
    animals without our oversight. Based on a recent
    review of compliance among facilities we regulate, we
    believe that even with the addition of another breeding
    female, these hobby breeders are likely to conform to
    minimum AWA standards.

    Hobby breeders should
    remain aware, however, that they are exempt from AWA
    regulation only if they sell the offspring of animals born
    and raised on their premises for pets or exhibition.
    They may sell these animals at retail or wholesale
    without being regulated.


    Like I said earlier I can't wade through the 91 pages document but I do find the factsheet interesting. How do you read the above statement?
    www.akita-inu.com
    www.Japanese-Akitas.com
    pedigrees.akita-inu.com
    Post edited by *JackBurton* at 2013-09-11 12:13:40
  • The 91 page document trumps the factsheet, and it says as much within said 91 page document.
    「怪獣荘秋田犬」Kaiju Kennels Japanese Akita and Hokkaido, Claire Matthews
    http://www.facebook.com/PoetikDragon
    http://www.facebook.com/KaijuKennels
    http://www.kaijukennels.com
  • @poeticdragon I'm lost at your response. It appears to me that the meat and potatoes of the document is found here:88-91 The rest of the document appears to be rationale on the changes. I am having trouble finding the clause in the regulation that says you are not exempt if you sell 1 dog site unseen on the internet.

    PART 1--DEFINITION OF TERMS
    1. The authority citation for part 1 continues to read as follows: Authority: 7 U.S.C. 2131-2159; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and 371.7. 2. In § 1.1, the definitions of dealer and retail pet store are revised to read as follows:
    § 1.1 Definitions. *****
    Dealer means any person who, in commerce, for compensation or profit, delivers for transportation, or transports, except as a carrier, buys, or sells, or negotiates the purchase or sale of: Any dog or other animal whether alive or dead (including unborn animals, organs, limbs, blood, serum, or other parts) for research, teaching, testing, experimentation, exhibition, or for use as a pet; or any dog at the wholesale level for hunting, security, or breeding purposes. This term does not include: A retail pet store, as defined in this section; any retail outlet where dogs are sold for hunting, breeding, or security purposes; or any person who does not sell or negotiate the purchase or sale of any wild or exotic animal, dog, or cat and who derives no more than $500 gross income from the sale of animals other than wild or exotic animals, dogs, or cats during any calendar year. *****
    88
    Retail pet store means a place of business or residence at which the seller, buyer, and the animal available for sale are physically present so that every buyer may personally observe the animal prior to purchasing and/or taking custody of that animal after purchase, and where only the following animals are sold or offered for sale, at retail, for use as pets: Dogs, cats, rabbits, guinea pigs, hamsters, gerbils, rats, mice, gophers, chinchillas, domestic ferrets, domestic farm animals, birds, and coldblooded species. In addition to persons that meet these criteria, retail pet store also includes any person who meets the criteria in § 2.1(a)(3)(vii) of this subchapter. Such definition excludes—
    (1) Establishments or persons who deal in dogs used for hunting, security, or breeding purposes;
    (2) Establishments or persons, except those that meet the criteria in § 2.1(a)(3)(vii), exhibiting, selling, or offering to exhibit or sell any wild or exotic or other nonpet species of warmblooded animals (except birds), such as skunks, raccoons, nonhuman primates, squirrels, ocelots, foxes, coyotes, etc.;
    (3) Any establishment or person selling warmblooded animals (except birds, and laboratory rats and mice) for research or exhibition purposes;
    (4) Any establishment wholesaling any animals (except birds, rats, and mice); and
    (5) Any establishment exhibiting pet animals in a room that is separate from or adjacent to the retail pet store, or in an outside area, or anywhere off the retail pet store premises. ***** PART 2--REGULATIONS
    3. The authority citation for part 2 continues to read as follows:
    89
    Authority: 7 U.S.C. 2131-2159; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and 371.7. 4. Section 2.1 is amended as follows: a. By revising paragraph (a)(3)(i); b. In paragraph (a)(3)(ii), by removing the words ''to a research facility, an exhibitor, a
    dealer, or a pet store''; c. By revising paragraphs (a)(3)(iii) and (a)(3)(vii); and d. In the OMB citation at the end of the section, by removing the words ‘‘number 0579-
    0254’’ and adding the words ‘‘numbers 0579-0254 and 0579-0392’’ in their place. The revisions read as follows: § 2.1 Requirements and application.
    (a)* * * (3)* * * (i) Retail pet stores as defined in part 1 of this subchapter;
    ***** (iii) Any person who maintains a total of four or fewer breeding female dogs, cats, and/or
    small exotic or wild mammals, such as hedgehogs, degus, spiny mice, prairie dogs, flying squirrels, and jerboas, and who sells, at wholesale, only the offspring of these dogs, cats, and/or small exotic or wild mammals, which were born and raised on his or her premises, for pets or exhibition, and is not otherwise required to obtain a license. This exemption does not extend to any person residing in a household that collectively maintains a total of more than four breeding female dogs, cats, and/or small exotic or wild mammals, regardless of ownership, nor to any person maintaining breeding female dogs, cats, and/or small exotic or wild mammals on premises on which more than four breeding female dogs, cats, and/or small exotic or wild
    90
    mammals are maintained, nor to any person acting in concert with others where they collectively maintain a total of more than four breeding female dogs, cats, and/or small exotic or wild mammals regardless of ownership; *****
    (vii) Any person including, but not limited to, purebred dog or cat fanciers, who maintains a total of four or fewer breeding female dogs, cats, and/or small exotic or wild mammals, such as hedgehogs, degus, spiny mice, prairie dogs, flying squirrels, and jerboas, and who sells, at retail, only the offspring of these dogs, cats, and/or small exotic or wild mammals, which were born and raised on his or her premises, for pets or exhibition, and is not otherwise required to obtain a license. This exemption does not extend to any person residing in a household that collectively maintains a total of more than four breeding female dogs, cats, and/or small exotic or wild mammals, regardless of ownership, nor to any person maintaining breeding female dogs, cats, and/or small exotic or wild mammals on premises on which more than four breeding female dogs, cats, and/or small exotic or wild mammals are maintained, nor to any person acting in concert with others where they collectively maintain a total of more than four breeding female dogs, cats, and/or small exotic or wild mammals regardless of ownership. *****

    www.akita-inu.com
    www.Japanese-Akitas.com
    pedigrees.akita-inu.com
  • aykayk
    Posts: 1979
    Limit is still 4 breeding (breedable) females of the listed species. They used the term "hobby breeder" in response to the feedback that they received, but it's not a recognized catagory.

    If a hobby breeder sells a pup/dog *not* born on their premise, they fall under the "dealer" definition, which seems to have its own set of rules/licensing. (Dealer rules/licensing is not the focus of this document.)

    If a hobby breeder sells a pet/exhibition pup/dog born on their premise *and* has more than 4 breedable females, there needs to be a in-person visit by the buyer or USDA licenses.





    Post edited by ayk at 2013-09-11 13:15:48
  • @*JackBurton* If you sell one dog sight unseen AND maintain more than 4 breeding females you are not exempt. The four breeding female rule is the exception to almost everything so I wasn't discussing that.

    If someone has four or fewer intact female animals they can safely ignore this entire forum topic and regulation UNLESS they sell any dog that was not born and raised on premises. This includes dogs imported from Japan (eg. retired breeding stock), any "puppy back" from stud services, and POSSIBLY puppies born at a vet's office. It is up to the discretion of the inspector whether to allow puppies born off-site, including at a vet, to be classified as exempt sales. By default, without the inspector giving you a free pass, selling puppies born at a vet's office will cause you to lose exempt status.

    Some interesting things about how many breeding females you "maintain."

    - There is no defined minimum or maximum age or health requirement. All intact females are considered breeding females until the inspector decides otherwise.

    - The burden of proof that a female is not intact falls upon the seller. All females are considered to be intact until proven otherwise.

    - The total sum of intact female animals of any species which the AWA protects is what counts. You may not have four intact female dogs and four intact female cats and remain exempt.

    - Maintenance of a breeding female is directly related to residency, not ownership. Females that you have no ownership stake in but which are "collectively maintained" at your premises will count against you.

    - Residency is not well defined. It states that even temporary residence counts as "maintenance," but it does not indicate how temporary. Does taking my dog to another breeder's house to be bred count as residency? What if she doesn't stay the night? What if she stays 10 nights?

    - The limit on the number of breeding females is based on premises. If you have multiple premises, you may have four breeding females at each. Owning or co-owning an intact female that doesn't live with you will not count against your premises but she will count against the premises at which she resides.

    Unfortunately we don't have a good definition of residency, so taking advantage of the last one may be difficult. Note, however, that if you wish to sell puppies from a bitch that lives with someone else, she must come back to your house to whelp and nurse them. If she does not, then only the person she lives with can sell those puppies and remain exempt.
    「怪獣荘秋田犬」Kaiju Kennels Japanese Akita and Hokkaido, Claire Matthews
    http://www.facebook.com/PoetikDragon
    http://www.facebook.com/KaijuKennels
    http://www.kaijukennels.com
    Post edited by PoetikDragon at 2013-09-11 14:11:59
  • Right so the key here which I've been saying all along lies in the four intact females.
    www.akita-inu.com
    www.Japanese-Akitas.com
    pedigrees.akita-inu.com
  • BradA1878BradA1878
    Posts: 12224
    I don't really want to add to the hysteria over this, which is why I've not commented.

    However, I did want to say that, without the cooperation from the community (keeping intact dogs), this could potentially destroy the efforts to preserve the very rare NK breeds in this country as it will severely limit the efforts of any one single person (breeder).
  • One weird thing I found was in the fact sheet section about estimating costs and profits of this new rule.

    Q. How much will it cost for newly regulated breeders for licensing, identification tags, and recordkeeping?

    A. For a typical dog breeder with 6 breeding females and a total of 74 dogs on the property over the course of a year, we estimate that the typical annual cost for licensing, identification tags, and recordkeeping would be between about $284 to $550 or from about $4 to $7.50 per dog.


    I find it interesting because of the number of dogs estimated to be on the property over the course of the year. Unless those 6 brood bitches magically produce nothing but male puppies, some of those 74 dogs will be female. Yet they will be intact at birth and breedable until an inspector decides otherwise...

    This is probably just yet another inconsistency, but I still found it worth drawing attention to.
    「怪獣荘秋田犬」Kaiju Kennels Japanese Akita and Hokkaido, Claire Matthews
    http://www.facebook.com/PoetikDragon
    http://www.facebook.com/KaijuKennels
    http://www.kaijukennels.com
    Post edited by PoetikDragon at 2013-09-11 14:28:18
  • @brada1878 my thoughts exactly. For rare breeds that are already constricted by the limited number of breeders, this legislation really cripples any preservation effort.
  • mdokicmdokic
    Posts: 1020
    As Stacey said above,
    There was also a line talking about preserving a bloodline. I would think that the rare breeds could fall under that.
    I saw that part..so shouldn't that at least be some good news for the rare breeds like Kai @brada1878? If they don't fall under that category, I don't know which breeds do..
    Michelle, with Kai girls Kona and Kimber
    DSC_6037_NEW_banner
  • aykayk
    Posts: 1979
    The rare bloodlines is going under the catagory that all the dogs are going to be breeding dogs and not pets.
  • BradA1878BradA1878
    Posts: 12224
    @mdokic - I dunno, I have not seen that line.

    @sjp051993 - Where did you see that line?
  • BradA1878BradA1878
    Posts: 12224
    Thanks @ayk
  • Many animal rescue groups, pounds, shelters and humane societies will continue to be exempt from APHIS regulations. Also exempt are the following: people who breed and sell working dogs; people selling rabbits for food, fiber (including fur) or for the preservation of bloodlines; children who raise rabbits as part of a 4-H project; operations that raise, buy and sell farm animals for food or fiber (including fur); and businesses that deal only with fish, reptiles and other cold-blooded animals.

    I have not read the official 91 page document yet.
    Stacey living with Tora, Kazue, Ritsu and Kuma the Shiba
    www.suteishiikennels.com

    DSCF0686IMG_0940 - Version 2DSCF0714IMG_1151

    10443860_10202258803333634_2133731540_n
  • mdokicmdokic
    Posts: 1020
    Thanks @sjp051993. Ah I see @ayk...that's interesting. So that means all dogs for the preservation effort you own have to be breeding dogs?? You can't keep any as pets? You can only breed them for so long though, so that doesn't 100% make sense to me..

    I need to actually sit down and read the whole document before I ask anymore questions. I apologize if my questions are silly.
    Michelle, with Kai girls Kona and Kimber
    DSC_6037_NEW_banner
  • Maybe I need to check into what it takes to become a USDA inspector. I know the ones I work with every day are idiots.
    Stacey living with Tora, Kazue, Ritsu and Kuma the Shiba
    www.suteishiikennels.com

    DSCF0686IMG_0940 - Version 2DSCF0714IMG_1151

    10443860_10202258803333634_2133731540_n
  • @sjp051993 that sentence part is about rabbits being sold for the preservation of bloodlines.

    However, the big document does say that breeding dogs are exempt, along with hunting, security, and "other purpose" working dogs. It clarifies that breeding, hunting, and security dogs are merely examples of purposes for a dog. Guide dogs and other service animals are also exempt; indeed, any purpose which is not one of the main six gets a free pass.

    That said, if you sell ANY dog for one of the six purposes which are not exempt (research, teaching, testing, experimentation, exhibition, or pet) you lose the exemption. A dog which is sold for multiple purposes, and one of those purposes is one of those six things, will also cause you to lose the exemption.

    In short, if you wish to claim preservation of rare bloodlines, ALL puppies you sell must be sold for breeding and must NOT be pets or show dogs. (Yes, it makes no sense.)
    「怪獣荘秋田犬」Kaiju Kennels Japanese Akita and Hokkaido, Claire Matthews
    http://www.facebook.com/PoetikDragon
    http://www.facebook.com/KaijuKennels
    http://www.kaijukennels.com
    Post edited by PoetikDragon at 2013-09-11 16:43:16
  • mdokicmdokic
    Posts: 1020
    Holy. Shizballs. You have to be kidding me.. Thanks for clarifying @poeticdragon

    ETA: So basically this sounds to me like if you wanted to preserve a breed, it would be easier to have several people in touch collaborating in breeding efforts (each with less than 4 "breeding females") than having one person trying to make it work with many breeding females..Uy yuy. This is going to get interesting, isn't it...
    Michelle, with Kai girls Kona and Kimber
    DSC_6037_NEW_banner
    Post edited by mdokic at 2013-09-11 16:40:50
  • FYI this regulation is not retroactive. If breeders with more than four intact females stop using "pet quality" and "show quality" to define their puppies and come up with some purpose that all or most of the dogs they produce in the future can be trained to do (including breeding) and advertise their puppies for that purpose... they should be covered.

    My primary concern is that we cannot sell retired show/breeding dogs or imports that didn't work out for our breeding program, regardless of the number of females owned.
    「怪獣荘秋田犬」Kaiju Kennels Japanese Akita and Hokkaido, Claire Matthews
    http://www.facebook.com/PoetikDragon
    http://www.facebook.com/KaijuKennels
    http://www.kaijukennels.com
    Post edited by PoetikDragon at 2013-09-11 16:54:24
  • PD - we can still sell retired dogs face to face right. Also I made an email theJACAlist so membership can discuss this.

    I also noticed something about some dogs could be sold that are not up to the task.
    www.akita-inu.com
    www.Japanese-Akitas.com
    pedigrees.akita-inu.com
  • CrispyCrispy
    Posts: 1825
    Are 501c3 orgs exempt? Is it possible for a breeder to obtain 501c3 if they are a preservation not-for-profit?

    Sorry if that sounds dumb, but would compensation or donations for other resources for that animal count as selling an animal?
    Akiyama no Roushya || 秋山の狼室 || www.kishu-ken.org
  • Brad has hit at the heart of what we need to do, it going to take cooperation to bridge the gene pool issue.

    We kinda had an idea this was coming down the pike last year but talk about stinkin it up with convoluted messy info ….. bit of an assumption on cost and effort too. Until there is detailed compliance info it is going to be speculation as far as answers to many of our questions.

    Here is a link to the flow chart from the past (change in limit to 4 intact females).

    http://www.ofwlaw.com/CM/Custom/APHIS AWA Retail Pet Stores and Licensing Exemption Flowchart (00299615).PDF

    In being well informed, what I am trying to figure out where the "risk base inspection system" they speak of is outlined that calculates the risk levels for a kennel? In addition, where is the "facility compliance standard" documentation listed for AWA? I am not familiar with the APHIS process so maybe I missed it, but I don't see regulation standards for "wholesalers" or reference to where those regs can be found for those that have more than four breeding bitches. If someone has a link to any of the aforementioned please post it.

    Snf
  • ceziegcezieg
    Posts: 1050
    I think there's a bit too much weight being placed into this. There's nothing stopping anyone from doing private face-to-face dealings, and they certainly won't have the resources/funding to police and entire country's worth of breeders. Just make people sign contracts with a clause saying that they are not for show/only for preservation, and you are CYA'ing yourself just fine. Once the dog is out of your hands then your responsibility ends there, and what the new owner does with the pet is their own business. Just make the paperwork reflect the rules, and anything extra is a non-issue. That's all they care about to be honest.
    Ren, Kai Ken (f, intact) 02-01-2012
    Kirin, Alaskan Noble Companion Dog (f, intact) 05-04-2015
  • @Crispy No, there are no specific exemptions for 501c3 or rescues. There are comments about why they chose not to do so, mainly that even rescues can get overwhelmed and have poor living conditions. Therefor they must be subjected to the same public oversight. I know of a number of incidents of a "rescue" actually being a hoarder in disguise...

    @*JackBurton* Right. Any animal which was not born and raised on your premises must be sold face-to-face to remain exempt. The four female rule does not apply. Here is the entire section explained:

    Breeding Females and Offspring: “And who sells only the offspring of these dogs, cats, or small exotic or wild mammals, which were born and raised on his or her premises….”

    [...]

    Several commenters stated that breeders often sell a breeding female to individuals who are aspiring breeders or who wish to add new bloodlines to their breeding program; one commenter stated that the occasional addition of such bloodlines is necessary in order to preserve genetic diversity in his breed. Other commenters stated that they occasionally sold "retired" breeding females to friends or acquaintances as pets. A number of commenters suggested that we amend the paragraph so that both the breeding females and their offspring may be sold.

    We are not amending the paragraph in the manner suggested by the commenter. The paragraph pertains to a distinct category of breeders that APHIS has evaluated and determined to be low risk for noncompliance with the AWA. The amendments requested by the commenters would expand the paragraph’s scope to include breeders that APHIS has not evaluated.

    We note, however, that the commenters who stated that they sold breeding females as pets did not specify where the breeding females were born and raised. The exemption allowance on the number of breeding females only applies when dogs are sold that are born and raised on the seller’s premises. If the breeding females were not born and raised on the premises, the seller does not qualify for this exemption regardless of the number of breeding females they maintain, but may still be exempt from licensing as a retail pet store depending on the manner in which they sell the animals (i.e., face-to-face). Breeders who sell breeding females for purposes other than the six uses listed in the definition of dealer may also be exempt under this rule.


    EDIT: I am going to make a "Do I need a license?" flow chart later :)
    「怪獣荘秋田犬」Kaiju Kennels Japanese Akita and Hokkaido, Claire Matthews
    http://www.facebook.com/PoetikDragon
    http://www.facebook.com/KaijuKennels
    http://www.kaijukennels.com
    Post edited by PoetikDragon at 2013-09-11 18:15:43
  • @ cezieg, for those with few dogs it is simpler. For those who have more than four intact females they will need more info on guideline to meet compliance and answer the many questions people have.

    Snf
    Post edited by StaticNfuzz at 2013-09-11 18:14:28
  • @cezeig That was basically the point of my above post. Breeders with more than 4 intact females can just stop using "pet quality" or "show quality" entirely. However, they must also advertise and promote their dogs for sale for some specific purpose other than pet or exhibition. It is alright if some puppies are not suitable for that purpose and end up as pets, but the seller must show that the intent was there.
    「怪獣荘秋田犬」Kaiju Kennels Japanese Akita and Hokkaido, Claire Matthews
    http://www.facebook.com/PoetikDragon
    http://www.facebook.com/KaijuKennels
    http://www.kaijukennels.com
    Post edited by PoetikDragon at 2013-09-11 18:27:08
  • Static you hit the nail on the head co-op is the ideal way to go.

    I've been moving away from pet show for a couple litters now. I get plenty of pet apps so I'm just going to have people come get them and the long coats. The shows which "meet the standard" are the only shipped pups. I'll still keep with my policy of paying for the owners Akiho and JACA membership as this promotes the preservation angle. Besides ill only have two intact females.

    One thing that I won't get involved in is importing pups for others.
    www.akita-inu.com
    www.Japanese-Akitas.com
    pedigrees.akita-inu.com
  • ceziegcezieg
    Posts: 1050
    @ cezieg, for those with few dogs it is simpler. For those who have more than four intact females they will need more info on guideline to meet compliance and answer the many questions people have.

    Snf


    Absolutely. I meant moreso along the actual sale aspect of it. It sounds like preservation breeding is protected nicely, and it's the sale methods that are the most critical aspect. So it's primarily a legal issue of covering oneself.

    It's all very similar to the sale of firearms. There really isn't any enforceable regulation outside of vendor and mail order sales. For a similar situation, I could sell all the moonshine I want face to face, it's when it goes through the mail or taxable channels that it becomes an issue.

    Also, keep in mind that emails count as legal communication documents that can be utilized in court for any reason. Just a helpful tidbit.
    Ren, Kai Ken (f, intact) 02-01-2012
    Kirin, Alaskan Noble Companion Dog (f, intact) 05-04-2015
    Post edited by cezieg at 2013-09-11 18:49:08
  • So it occurred to me that some terms which I had a problem with might already be defined in the current AWA, which they are.

    http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCODE-2009-title7/html/USCODE-2009-title7-chap54.htm

    The term "intermediate handler" means any person including a department, agency, or instrumentality of the United States or of any State or local government (other than a dealer, research facility, exhibitor, any person excluded from the definition of a dealer, research facility, or exhibitor, an operator of an auction sale, or a carrier) who is engaged in any business in which he receives custody of animals in connection with their transportation in commerce;


    This is such a broad definition and gives us a lot of "wiggle room" with the face-to-face requirement. In essence, as long as the person who takes the dog from your premises to the airport is not you or someone employed by you and is not a professional animal transporter, you should be fine. My husband suggested making a simple form for buyers to sign and send back, which names a local person as their proxy... just to be safe.
    「怪獣荘秋田犬」Kaiju Kennels Japanese Akita and Hokkaido, Claire Matthews
    http://www.facebook.com/PoetikDragon
    http://www.facebook.com/KaijuKennels
    http://www.kaijukennels.com
    Post edited by PoetikDragon at 2013-09-11 20:08:41
  • Ohhhh here's a good one. A person who goes to dog shows is not an exhibitor; does that mean that showing does doesn't count as exhibition? If so, labeling all puppies as show dogs, and claiming you are breeding for the purpose of showing dogs, would also be a good work around (and truthful at that).

    The term "exhibitor" means any person (public or private) exhibiting any animals, which were purchased in commerce or the intended distribution of which affects commerce, or will affect commerce, to the public for compensation, as determined by the Secretary, and such term includes carnivals, circuses, and zoos exhibiting such animals whether operated for profit or not; but such term excludes retail pet stores, organizations sponsoring and all persons participating in State and country fairs, livestock shows, rodeos, purebred dog and cat shows, and any other fairs or exhibitions intended to advance agricultural arts and sciences, as may be determined by the Secretary;
    「怪獣荘秋田犬」Kaiju Kennels Japanese Akita and Hokkaido, Claire Matthews
    http://www.facebook.com/PoetikDragon
    http://www.facebook.com/KaijuKennels
    http://www.kaijukennels.com
  • This link is also important:

    http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2012-05-16/html/2012-11839.htm
    「怪獣荘秋田犬」Kaiju Kennels Japanese Akita and Hokkaido, Claire Matthews
    http://www.facebook.com/PoetikDragon
    http://www.facebook.com/KaijuKennels
    http://www.kaijukennels.com
  • PD that we have letters indicating our dogs as show dogs because la city and la county have a show dog rule.

    Of course if they don't show they don't get a new letter from the clubs.
    www.akita-inu.com
    www.Japanese-Akitas.com
    pedigrees.akita-inu.com
    Post edited by *JackBurton* at 2013-09-11 20:47:55
  • That link is the short version of the 91 page doc.
    www.akita-inu.com
    www.Japanese-Akitas.com
    pedigrees.akita-inu.com
  • aykayk
    Posts: 1979
    This is exhausting. Someone said elsewhere to just get the AWA book. :-p

    I wish the AKC and/or UKC would offer seminars on how to understand these rules/definitions and how to be a legal breeder.
  • I'm making a flowchart. ;) Gimme a couple days though.
    「怪獣荘秋田犬」Kaiju Kennels Japanese Akita and Hokkaido, Claire Matthews
    http://www.facebook.com/PoetikDragon
    http://www.facebook.com/KaijuKennels
    http://www.kaijukennels.com
  • I am sure one if them will come out with something once there is a better understanding of the rules.
    Stacey living with Tora, Kazue, Ritsu and Kuma the Shiba
    www.suteishiikennels.com

    DSCF0686IMG_0940 - Version 2DSCF0714IMG_1151

    10443860_10202258803333634_2133731540_n
  • HeidiHeidi
    Posts: 3379
    Maybe you could put in your contracts that "this dog is to be used for working and/or breeding unless later found to be unfit for that purpose." If anyone comes knocking at your door, say, "Look, my intent was clearly that they be working/breeding dogs." They have no way to prove otherwise, because they didn't provide any criteria for what a suitable working/breeding dog was. You can just say, he looked at me funn, he's not a good working dog. They can't argue.

    According to the document, breeders can have the dogs in their own homes, and are essentially pets, so I don't see anything stopping anyone else from doing that.

    The exhibition bit is tricky, because it excludes you from dog shows, but I'm still not clear on whether a dog can be a working dog and a show dog, and is exempt (I don't see anything explicitly stating this).

    I would stop doing co-ownerships and if you want to breed the dog, just have it say in the contract that you can breed the dog x number of times if you want.

    Have more (non-recordable) phone conversations, as opposed electronic messaging of any kind which can be recorded. Have a friend pick the puppy up and drive it to the airport, just to be on the safe side.
    Rakka 落下(Shikoku Ken), Sosuke 宗介 (Kai Ken), Hester, Stephanie, and Batgirl(cats)
    image
  • HeidiHeidi
    Posts: 3379
    Last resort: Canadian NK preservation dog ranch. Refuge for all breeding females who need to escape The Man!
    Rakka 落下(Shikoku Ken), Sosuke 宗介 (Kai Ken), Hester, Stephanie, and Batgirl(cats)
    image
  • ceziegcezieg
    Posts: 1050
    Last resort: Canadian NK preservation dog ranch. Refuge for all breeding females who need to escape The Man!


    @brada1878 What do you say, up for move #4 or #5 in only two years? :P
    Ren, Kai Ken (f, intact) 02-01-2012
    Kirin, Alaskan Noble Companion Dog (f, intact) 05-04-2015
  • mdokicmdokic
    Posts: 1020
    HAHAHAHAHA @hondru, I just got the best laugh out of that!! xP
    Michelle, with Kai girls Kona and Kimber
    DSC_6037_NEW_banner
  • http://tyrannyandliberty.blogspot.com/2013/09/the-usda-pounds-nail-into-coffin-of.html
    www.akita-inu.com
    www.Japanese-Akitas.com
    pedigrees.akita-inu.com
  • So, if you do end up needing to get a license for whatever reasons, now you can have your civil rights violated, too!

    http://www.thedogpress.com/SideEffects/ASPCA-Violates-Breeders_Losey137.asp
    「怪獣荘秋田犬」Kaiju Kennels Japanese Akita and Hokkaido, Claire Matthews
    http://www.facebook.com/PoetikDragon
    http://www.facebook.com/KaijuKennels
    http://www.kaijukennels.com
  • I actually believe some of that is good....not in the way hobby breeders will be targeted, but I am in favor of seeing pics of property ofpeople who currently hold USDA liscences (commercial breeders) because it is clear from the photos, when people see them, that these are mills. Often, if you have an address, you can see it on google earth anyway, and that's how we've been able to identify some pretty awful mills who are trying to deny that they are mills.

    I think that article above is sensationalist, for one, and it's super problematic, because it's suggesting that commerical breeders are the same as hobby breeders. While I understand the ways in which these new rules are doing that to a degree, what this article is doing is eliding hobby breeders (who certainly would not at this stage be on the website, because they don't have USDA licencense) and commerical breeders. I WANT to see the photos of commerical breeders, especially because USDA requirements are so lax that even places that have no violations may be horrible for dogs. I believe if people see what those places are like, they may not buy from them.

    The stuff about people's emails being read? Where did he even get that? Unless he's "just" talking about the NSA? :)

    I don't know how to work around these problems, but protecting commericial breeders, or making common cause with them, is NOT the way to go. And to me, it sounds like that is who he is trying to protect.

    I don't see how anyone's civil rights are being violated either.
    Lisa, Toby (Shiba), Oskar and Zora (American Akita), and Leo (Kai Ken)
  • I'm fine with exposing puppy mills (corporations / business properties). I am NOT fine with any individual's name, photos, and private home address published on a site without their consent. Not only is it a violation of civil rights, but due to the nature of the website, it can and will lead to hate crimes. Vigilantes and PETA nutcases will use it to target people, the same way that already has happened with sex offender lists.
    「怪獣荘秋田犬」Kaiju Kennels Japanese Akita and Hokkaido, Claire Matthews
    http://www.facebook.com/PoetikDragon
    http://www.facebook.com/KaijuKennels
    http://www.kaijukennels.com
    Post edited by PoetikDragon at 2013-09-15 00:39:46
  • tjbart17tjbart17
    Posts: 4055
    Just a quick reminder to everyone what a hate crime is before it's mentioned again.

    "In both crime and law, hate crimes (also known as bias-motivated crimes, or race hate) occur when a perpetrator targets a victim because of his or her perceived membership in a certain social group. Examples of such groups include but are not limited to: racial group, religion, sexual orientation, ethnicity or gender identity.[1]

    Hate crime is a category used to describe bias-motivated violence: 'assault, injury, and murder on the basis of certain personal characteristics: different appearance, different color, different nationality, different language, different religion.'[2]

    "Hate crime" generally refers to criminal acts that are seen to have been motivated by bias against one or more of the types above, or of their derivatives.

    Just a simple definition from Wikipedia. The legal definition is #2. Breeders are not a protected class and can not legally be the victim of a hate crime.

    Thank you
  • lindsaytlindsayt
    Posts: 3432
    Yet.
    info@hokkaidoken.org
    www.hokkaidoken.com
    www.hokkaidousa.wordpress.com
  • Yeah I was going to post that last night but lost my power.

    hate crimes= someone being targeted because of race/ethnicity/religion or sexual orientation. The person has to be a member of a minority group in one of these areas.

    If a breeder is a member of a protected group, they could be a target of a hate crime IF the attack is based on race/ethnicity/religion/sexual orientation whatever, but not simply for being a breeder. That's not going to change.

    The same with civil rights violation. I'm not saying there might not be crimes against breeders--could happen--but it will not likely be "hate crimes" nor a violation of civil rights. These things have specific definitions and and refer to specific issues (often tied to the minority status of the person involved) and I'm always annoyed seeing these terms thrown around in a way that they do not actually apply.

    The sex offender list is also a bad comparison, since the publication of such information in those cases is actually legal, and legally mandated.

    anyway, while there is always a threat of fringe animal rights groups going after a reputable breeder, the ASPCA is not going to, nor any of the bigger groups. And if they target puppy mills that's fine with me. I'd love to see the mills shut down, and just wish this actually did something towards that.
    Lisa, Toby (Shiba), Oskar and Zora (American Akita), and Leo (Kai Ken)
  • tjbart17tjbart17
    Posts: 4055
    @lindsayt I'm not saying that breeder's wouldn't be targeted (although I do think there is some hysteria in this thread), what I am saying is that it would not be defined as a "hate crime."

    Being 1 of 5 cousins out of 50 in the US that is actually all "white" I was raised to really understand my white privilege and be cognizant of it. I have seen, and first hand experienced, hate crimes which to me are the most disgusting crimes of all time. To me having people who are part of a privileged community use these terms to describe something that isn't a civil rights violation is undermining what thousands of people were injured and murdered to finally have defined. And let it be known that people had to die to have their class added to this group, ie the homosexual community today was only recently added after a young man gave his life. Let's keep the term to represent their plight and sacrifice.

    Thank you

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

In this Discussion