Should a law be passed to limit breeders to 2 litters a year ????

Question

I think a new animal rights law should be passed requiring that breeders can only have two litters per year.
Each mom dog
dad dog
and the pups should be registered with each state where the dogs are bred.
The breeder must pay a tax on all dogs & pups in their business.
Once a puppy is sold/bought the new owner then
registers with the animal rights or local government to make sure that the same pups are accounted for.
in other words breeders should not be allowed to just keep making caged and neglected dogs keep having puppies.
this is unhealthy for a dog to live like that.
What do you think?
regulated pet breeding?
limited litters?
limited breeder dogs/
only enough to keep the breed going?
Every week i swaer i see at least 100 puppy ads?
Why?
There are plenty dogs for people to get as it is.

You should look at some videos of how these dogs are housed to breed
no exercise no life....
Man's best Friend
is made to breed till they die from poor health
And some pups are deformed
look at North Shore Animal League's website the three-legged
Chihuahua pups
I do not say not to breed pups i am saying give the dogs that are breeding a better life...

http://www.newschannel5.com/global/story.asp?s=5569295

here is what I am making my point about...

this question is only in regards to breeders who breed for money not the ethical breeding to keep a breed from going extinct.
Of course it is unfair to lump all breeders into one lump.
This is a question asking why every week in every state every city , are there 100 classifieds for puppies?
When the Humane Societies and other Animal Rescue Organizations can't keep up with them or place them all in good homes?
That is my question regulation not obliteration .

Answer 1

Definitely agree. Although I'm not sure how that could possibly be regulated/enforced.

Answer 2

No I do not think that is a good idea. For one thing, part of the problem that we have is we live in a disposable society. People buy dogs without doing any research and when the novelty of the new puppy wears off and they are faced with the problems and work a new puppy presents they decide just to get rid of it or they treat the dog like a human and then the dog becomes unruly, destructive or aggressive and they get rid of it. People need to become educated on the behavior and care of dogs BEFORE they get one, they also need to understand ALL dogs regardless of breed need training and socialization. Most importantly, people need to understand pets are for life not just while they are small, cute or convenient. Education is the key to solving the problem. If people would retain their animals for the duration of their life, there would be less demand for puppies and the greedy breeders would quit breeding if they could not move their puppies and make money.
A plan such as you are proposing would not help the conditions of breeding animals because when fees start being implemented they are going to be expensive and responsible breeders will not be able to afford to breed and the ones that will be able to afford it are the Commercial breeders and puppymills because they move puppies on a higher scale and let's face it if they have the money the limit will not be enforced.
If we ask the government to solve all our problems we may not like the outcome, but then it will be too late.

ETA: With regulation comes obliteration!!!
As Freedom said look at California their new law will wipe out pets in about 15 years, this is what happens when you ask the government for regulation. Once again EDUCATION is the key.

Answer 3

While I think it sounds like a good idea on paper, it isn't really going to work. You're right, "breeders" should not be allowed to just keep making caged and neglected dogs keep having puppies. However, what you have just described is NOT a breeder but rather a puppy mill. The conditions you describe for puppy mills would all be eliminated if current animal laws were enforced. Speaking of enforcement...how do you plan on convincing new dog owners to register their pups with animal rights or local governments? It's impossible to enforce the mandatory rabies vaccination and registration laws that are present in virtually every county in the United States as it is...there's no way you're going to convince hundreds of ignorant dog owners who shouldn't be buying a dog in the first place that they should register with some agency (not that all or even the majority of puppy buyers are ignorant, but there are a significant number who are).

Personally I'd rather see my tax money and already overstretched animal control manpower go to enforcing the current animal laws that actually have the potential to make a difference rather than introducing new laws that are even more impractical to enforce than current laws. Not to mention that such laws rarely affect the people who keep dogs in the situations described above but almost ALWAYS have a negative impact on the already responsible owners and breeders who are doing right by their dogs.

Answer 4

Subjecting GOOD breeders to the same set of laws will mean they no longer are able to be breeding, and the high-volume commercial breeders will continue to bribe their way through inspections and fly 'under the radar'. Backyard breeders won't even know there is a law, so it won't matter to them either.

The last thing this country needs is more laws governing people's basic rights when the laws that ARE in place in most areas aren't even being enforced. Getting your dogs registered with "Animal Rights or local government" means those folks will show up at your door and take your animals away if they happen to be a breed that ends up being banned. Don't think it won't happen-- it happened just that way in Denver. The city required all owners of Pit Bulls and pit-type dogs to register for a license. Responsible owners did so, then the police and animal control showed up at their door and seized their dogs and euthanized them. Those that registered were the first ones hit. Those that didn't register were able to get their dogs out of town or hidden in time. New laws are not the answer, they will only affect responsible breeders and owners that aren't doing anything wrong as is.

I'd like to see the current laws for humane housing, care, and feeding of all dogs enforced before we start adding more assinine laws that only end up affecting people doing things the right way to begin with. Do most places have laws about proper animal care? You bet. Are those laws adequately enforced? Yeah. Right. Not in 90% of the country.

This country does not have a pet overpopulation problem. What it has is a pet retention problem where people who want a pet don't do the research to find out what breeds work for them or if they even can afford the time and money to have a dog. Then the dog gets a little older, loses it's puppy cuteness, and gets dumped at the shelter because the owners forgot it would grow up and need some training. Shelters in many areas of the country are importing dogs from other areas or even other countries to fill demand for dogs other than lab mixes and pit mixes.

If the laws already in place were enforced, commercial breeders would be forced to take adequate care of their animals. Additional laws aren't needed.

Answer 5

You simply can not throw all breeders into the same catagory and place absurd laws about breeding. A very well bred CH stud dog with many CH get can get used several times a year in a very responsible way. I know of a few really great dogs who have sired 12 litters a year or more all by responsible breeders. Who are animal rights assholes to say whether or not this should happen? A rule such as this would do nothing to puppy mills and only harm 'real' enthusiast of the sport of showing dogs and breeding responsibly.
Also, reputable breeders will occasionally breed 2 litters back to back and guess what.. this does not harm a bitc.h in any way. The leading reproduction specialist in the country even recommends back to back breedings on occasions.
Then talking about no more then 2 litters being born per year from one ******... No law needed as it is not even possible in the first place.
This country is regulated enough. The way to deal with puppy mills and ignorant back yard breeders is to educate people on where and how to obtain pets and put them out of business naturally. Making laws that harm anyone other then the idiots is not the way to go about it.
You need to think twice before you support any assanine laws about regulating pets or you might one day find yourself unable to own one. Look at what is happening in California.. Welcome to California.. NO PETS ALLOWED. The AR people are out of control and won't be happy if they are not controlling everyone. A bunch of brain washed wacko's with inflated numbers and hidden agenda's. Do some research on these kinds of thigs before you go making suggestions that effect responsible people and treat everyone the same as a puppy mill or back yard breeder.

There is no way to make a law for this type of breeder that won't effect all breeders. WHO will decide who is ethical and who isn't? What one person see's as to many litters or whatever, another person might not see it the same way.
Education is the key. I am so sick of people trying to force their beliefs and laws onto everyone else. I am in no way in support of puppy mills or back yard breeding but special interest groups ho target EVERYONE make me pretty disgusted. PETA and the HSUS can go to hell. Their numbers are inflated and they tell lies like crazy to sell their ideas. I support neither group OR any laws that effect all people.
The laws that are coming into vote now target everyone.. Owners, breeders, everyone. It will not stop puppy mills and will only generate fee's, fee's and more fee's for responsible people. People who truly think these kinds of laws are a good idea seriously need to look at some of the proposals coming up. They effect ALL.

Answer 6

well I think that in theory the idea is valid, but more laws require a lot of paperwork and more taxes. A qualified breeder would never impregnate the same dog within an 18mos period and no more than 3 litters. They can use the same male over again and I don't think the male minds ;)
A reputable breeder self regulates (in other words). The problem is that most of the bad breeders don't care about the health of the mother father grandmother etc. I don't think there is an easy answer.

Answer 7

What you are talking about is like a puppy farm which I am completely against...I don't think they should put a limit on their breeding...I think they should stop it altogether. But as for in home breeders, I am fine with them because they usually treat their animals really good, but they also often cost more from personal breeders. I got my cat from a personal breeder. As for their being plenty of dogs out there for people to get as it is...I understand where you are coming from with this, but most people want to get a puppy when they are small so they can raise it as there own...it makes you have a bond with it (both you to the dog and the dog to you)...people don't want adult animals because they don't get that same bond.

Answer 8

I never thought about it... but I do agree with you in some contexts. Two litters a year max. There are plenty of puppies, while they may not be toy schnauzer/poodle/shih-tzus that need to be adopted and loved. All the ones being created because of looks are ridiculous when there are so many poor malnourished dogs everywhere!

Answer 9

On the surface, it sounds like a good idea.

However...We have laws currently on the books in every state that would eliminate puppy mills** if **those laws were enforced! They are not...letters to your local elected officials may get the current laws better enforced.

Crooks would still find a way around them..siging up dogs under all of their relative's names, for instance..or claiming each dog had a litter of ten..

Only outlaws break laws..responsible breeders are already responsible..

Answer 10

Great idea if you are talking about bonafide responsible breeders. BYB & puppy mills should be banned intirely. The number of legitimate breeders should be limited as well. There are way too many dogs born for the number of homes available. Only one dog in ten gets a permanent home!

Answer 11

yes i think there should be especially since i have fostered over 20 dogs this year alone and it aint over yet . Oh most definately breeders should be limited to 2 liters a year but as to who will enforce the law that is another matter .