More on the Missouri BBB's Report on "Puppy Mills"

On Friday, I posted an initial report on the Missouri Better Business Bureau's report on "puppy mills" in the state of Missouri -- here is a copy of the 6 page report in its entirety.

It's an interesting read -- including quite a lot of information about the lack of enforcement issues, including:

1) Noting that the state BBB had received 352 complaints against dog breeders and sellers in the past 3 years -- and more than half of the complaints were unresolved. This compared to less that 25% of the complaints natinoally being left unresolved. Complaints involved people buying sick puppies, puppies that had died shortly after purchase and vet feess not reimbursed by the sellter and lack of promised registration papers.

2) The story of one case in which inspectors foudn 13 violations of current laws, including excessive excreta, feces, weeds, trash, unclean facilities and no shade for some dogs. A month later, inspectors caught the same kennel with 8 violations, including 6 repeat ones.  In total, the breeder had amassed 103 violations in 7 inspections in less than two years -- and yet was allowed to operate his business for two years without more strict enforcement from the USDA and the State. The man never held a state license.

3) State audits in 2001, 2004 and 2008 all note that not all licensed breeders were being inspected annually - even though it is required by state law.

4) Due to low staffing, Missouri inspectors are required to inspect more than twice as many kennels per inspector as inspectors in other states.

5) Enforcement actions against kennels as a percentage of licenced kennels averaged 15.7% nationally -- in Missouri, it averaged 8.3%

6) Part of the cost for inspection of these dog breeding operations comes from licensing fees -- fees which have not gone up since 1993.

The problem in Missouri keeps becoming more and more evident that the main reason bad commercial breeding operations have been allowed to thrive in the state is because of lack of enforcement of our current and existing laws -- which is not addressed by the current statewide "Puppymill initiative" which has been backed by $450,000 in contributions from HSUS.

We need to be focusing our efforts -- in both time and financial -- to solving the problem with real solutions to the lack of enforcement issues in the state...not on creating laws that make us feel good but don't begin to actually deal with the problems we actually face.

H/T: KC Pets Examiner via Twitter

Comments

[PetDocsOnCall09]

Seems like $450,000 could do a lot of good RIGHT NOW in the hands of the enforcement agency rather than ending up in the hands of lobbyists and lawmakers who may or may not make an appropriate law.

Better yet...I am betting that local shelters and rescue groups could put that money to even better use.

[Brent]

Exactly.

[YesBiscuit!]

I have never seen the logic in following "We don't enforce the laws already on the books for puppy mills" with "We need more laws with a broader scope". Call me simple but why not start by enforcing the existing laws and then see where we stand?

[Becky]

Yes, Biscuit!

[Eden Springs]

While it sounds great to say better enforcement of existing laws is the solution, the problem always comes down to one simple issue: MONEY. In order to do better enforcement, the governing body (local, state or federal) has to hire more workers to do more inspections. Given the current economy, that priority is lower than a worm's belly.

Too bad HSUS isn't really interested in helping animals half as much as they're interested in turning all animal owners into criminals.

[Karen]

Get rid of just one useless politician enacting more useless legislation and you could probably hire four inspectors for the same money!

[MichelleD]

I'll raise you one Karen...Get rid of just one useless animal rights group promoting more useless legislation!!

Can you imagine what could be done with the money wasted on donations to PETA and/or H$U$?

[MyDogMax]

Recently I spoke with a senator at political
gathering about puppy mills. I asked him to
help with this cause. He brushed me off and
said he had friends that supplement their income farming with mills. I wonder how
much money JB Hunt Trucking and other large
puppy mills contribute to his campaign?
What a jerk! He should try living in a small, dirty, wire cage without shelter for just one day!

[Brent]

Max,

It is a shame that so many politicians seem to base all of their decisions on who gives them donations -- and not on what is right or best.

You can easily contact the state ethics commission and find how who has donated money to them and how much. It's always an interesting read.

Even so, there are plenty of reasons not to support this initiative -- but it's a shame that someone might use financial interests as one of them.

[MyDogMax]

Brent,
Yes,it seems financial interest seems to rule over what is right and humane. I would
imagine many of the politicians have pets
and they would be angered by this. They
could use their position to help change the
laws and allow dogs in these horrible
mills to have easier life. I will inquire
to see who donates. The senator should take a stand for the dogs. He could win the hearts and votes of many animal lovers. If his friends are puppy millers at least make
them be humane about it. There is no shame
in that! Since they are under USDA they are not protected as pets, but cattle and hogs that are going to slaughter.