Twin Bills Target Breeders in Tennessee

[Tim Nunan]

These bills affects those that breed hunting dogs. - Tim

Oppose HB 386 and SB 258

The Tennessee Legislature is considering two bills this session that would set up a state licensing system for commercial breeders. The identical bills entitled “Commercial Breeder Act” are HB 386, sponsored by Representative Sontany, and SB 258, sponsored by Senator Jackson. The House bill has just passed the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Civil Practice and Procedure and the Senate bill is being considered by the Senate Commerce Labor and Agriculture. HB 386 passed the subcommittee without amendments and must now be evaluated by the full Judiciary Committee before proceeding to a House vote.

In some significant ways, these bills resemble HSUS supported anti-breeder legislation that has shown up in several other states so far this year.

The Tennessee Commercial Breeder Act:
-Applies to dogs and cats.
-Defines a commercial breeder as anyone who possesses or maintains 20 or more adult female dogs “in whole or in part for the purpose of the sale of their offspring as companion animals”.
-Limits the number of dogs/cats a commercial breeder can maintain to 75 unsterilized “companion animals” over the age of 6 month.
-Requires annual licensing of commercial breeders and sets up a fee structure of $500 per year for those owning 20-40 adult companion animals, and $1000 per year for those owning 41-75.
-Empowers the Commissioner of Agriculture to grant licenses, oversee compliance with standards, rules and regulations, and suspend licenses for non-compliance or cruelty. Breeder will be given a 10-day written notice of suspensions and may be granted a hearing to contest. Violations would constitute a Class B misdemeanor punishable
by fine only.
-Licenses will only be granted to applicants of “good moral character” after a criminal background check and inspection of the premises.
-Allows commercial breeder premises and records to be inspected at all reasonable times by the Commissioner, a representative of the Commissioner, or a legally constituted law enforcement agency.
-Requires commercial breeders to file semi-annual reports on the number of dogs/cats in their possession, the number of dogs/cats sold including the names and addresses of who purchased them, and the number of dogs/cats received by the breeder that were not purchased including the names and addresses of who they obtained them from.
-Grants the Commissioner authority to confiscate animals for failure to license and hand them over to local or federal animal welfare agencies or humane organization, like ASPCA or HSUS, and order the breeder to pay a security bond that could be transferred to the agency/organization for the cost of care.
-Subjects violators to a fine of $1000 per animal sold, offered or advertised without a license.

While steps should be taken to identify and eliminate substandard kennels, this bill stretches beyond that goal and imposes a licensing system on commercial breeders that could ensnare hobby breeders and sportsmen, while proving virtually unenforceable and ineffective.

This Act reads as though its main preoccupation is to introduce a complex layer of state regulation that will generate revenue through licenses and fines, not directly improve actual care and conditions for animals.

Many of the definitions provided are unclear and inconsistent and consequently make hobby breeders, trainers, handlers, hunt clubs, boarding kennels and private rescue networks vulnerable to commercial requirements.

Oppose number limits, like the 75 intact dog/cat cap contained in this Act, because they are arbitrary, unscientific and have been found to be unenforceable and vulnerable to court challenges. Furthermore, they have never been successful in addressing irresponsible breeding or negligent rescue operations. Limits and caps drive pet owners and breeders underground where they are harder to oversee and prevent abuse.

There are more effective solutions available to help eliminate substandard kennels, from greater enforcement of existing
anti-cruelty and nuisance laws to educating consumers about how to seek out responsible and humane sources of healthy pets.

Please take a moment to send an email or call your senator and representative, using the talking points below, letting them know that you oppose these bills.

Politely explain that this legislation misses the mark. Offer your expertise as a Tennessee resident with hands-on animal experience who they can rely on instead of an out of state organization for their information about pet issues. Let them know that responsible Tennessee breeders -- dedicated dog and cat lovers with great subject matter expertise and experience raising, breeding, placing, rescuing and training pets -- are ready to share our knowledge and offer these alternative solutions to more effectively and reasonably address concerns about animal welfare.

[Tim Nunan]

A SAOVA message to sportsmen, pet owners and farmers concerned about protecting their traditions, avocations and livelihoods from anti-hunting, anti-breeding, animal guardianship advocates. Forwarding and cross posting, with attribution, encouraged.
TENNESSEE ACTION ALERT

HB 386 Commercial Breeder Act introduced by Rep. Janis Sontany (D, Nashville) is scheduled to be heard in the Judiciary Committee on 4/29.

BILL SYNOPSIS
HB 386 classifies as a commercial breeder any person who possesses or maintains twenty (20) or more adult female dogs in whole or in part for the purpose of the sale of their offspring as companion animals. Requires background checks before license can be granted. Although not written in the bill, it has been confirmed that engineering standards will be used for facilities.

* TALKING POINTS *

* HB 386 assumes that an owner of 20 or more dogs or cats isn’t capable of managing and maintaining their animals in good health without state intervention. Numerical limits should not be used as the basis of legislation as numbers do not equate to the level of care a dog or cat receives.

* HB 386 calls for high license fees that could be easily increased.

* Background checks are required in order to obtain a license, treating dog/cat breeders as if they are potential criminals.

* It is already law that sales tax must be collected on puppy sales; creating and funding a huge regulatory scheme on breeders in order to collect tax is unnecessary and extreme.

* Enforcement of existing tax law and animal welfare laws are sufficient and new laws are not needed.

* Tennessee is facing a billion dollar budget shortfall. It is irresponsible to add approximately six million dollars to the budget to fund an inspection program that might cover a few hundred dog breeders.

ACTION NEEDED NOW! PLEASE CALL, FAX, AND EMAIL HOUSE JUSTICE COMMITTEE AND OPPOSE HB 386:

Rep. Kent Coleman (D, 49) - Chair
Phone (615) 741-6829 / Fax (615) 253-0332
rep.kent.coleman@capitol.tn.gov

Rep. Jon Lundberg (R, Bristol) - Vice Chair
Phone (615) 741-7623 / Fax (615) 253-0272
rep.jon.lundberg@capitol.tn.gov

Rep. Eddie Bass (D, 65)
Phone (615) 741-1864 / Fax (615) 741-1005
rep.eddie.bass@capitol.tn.gov

Rep. Karen D. Camper (D, 87)
Phone (901) 315-8899
Phone: (615) 741-1898
rep.karen.camper@capitol.tn.gov

Rep. Vance Dennis (R, 71)
Phone: (615) 741-2190 / Fax: (615) 253-0377
rep.vance.dennis@capitol.tn.gov

Rep. Henry Fincher (D,42) Vice Chair
Phone (615) 741-1875
rep.henry.fincher@capitol.tn.gov

Rep. Brian Kelsey (R,83), Chair
Phone (901) 522-9000
Phone (615) 741-4415 / Fax (615) 253-0349
rep.brian.kelsey@capitol.tn.gov

Rep. Mike Stewart (D, 52)
Phone: (615) 741-2184
rep.mike.stewart@capitol.tn.gov

Rep. Chad Faulkner (R, 36)
Phone: (615) 741-3335
rep.chad.faulkner@capitol.tn.gov

Rep. Judd Matheny (R, 47)
Phone (615) 741-7448 / Fax (615) 253-0226
rep.judd.matheny@capitol.tn.gov

Rep. Eric Watson (R, 22)
Phone (615) 741-7799 / Fax (615) 253-0252
rep.eric.watson@capitol.tn.gov

Additional talking points and contact information are available on the SAOVA website http://www.saova.org/Tennessee2.html

Please share this message widely.

Susan Wolf

Sportsmen's and Animal Owners' Voting Alliance - http://saova.org

[Tim Nunan]

Don't Forget SB0391, on Senate Judiciary Comm. Calendar for 04/29/2009

I realize that there is a lot going on at one time, but this one was (eventually) rolled to tomorrow as well. This is the senate version of the forfeiture bill.

I am attaching the bill summary below. The net result of both provisions of the bill would be to make it more likely for innocent people to lose their animals. As an aside, the Hickman County woman with the 700+ confiscated animals DID have some stolen (or otherwise missing) animals that belonged to other people on at least one of the occasions when she was investigated.

For more information about the ways in which civil asset forfeiture programs change law enforcement, see fear.org. Long story short, this bill is very much a "companion piece" to the Commercial Breeder Act.

If you have not yet written to the committee about this bill, please do so!

Bill Summary:

Present law authorizes any governmental animal control agency or any humane society, chartered by this state, into whose custody any victimized animal is placed, to petition the court requesting that the person from whom the animal is seized, or the owner of the seized animal, be ordered to post security. The court may suspend the posting of security pending the disposition of criminal charges, if the defendant is indigent. The security must be in an amount sufficient to secure payment of all reasonable expenses expected to be incurred by the governmental animal control agency or the humane society in caring and providing for the animal pending disposition of the criminal charges.

Under present law, if the person from whom the animal is seized is the owner of the animal and the person has not posted the security ordered pursuant to the present law provisions described above within 15 business days following the issuance of a security order, then the animal is deemed to have been abandoned and is forfeited to the governmental animal control agency or humane society for disposition in accordance with reasonable practices for the humane treatment of animals. However, if the person from whom the animal was seized is not the owner of the animal and the person has not posted the court-ordered security within 15 days, then the court must order the governmental animal control agency or the humane society to make all reasonable efforts to determine who the owner of the animal is and to notify the owner of the pending proceeding. This bill revises these provisions to instead provide that an animal would be abandoned and forfeited, as
described above, if the security is not posted within "72 hours" instead of within "15 business days." This bill specifies that a failure to post the ordered security would not forfeit any ownership rights in the animal except those of the defendant in the pending criminal proceeding.

Under present law, no animal is deemed to have been abandoned and forfeited to the governmental animal control agency or humane society until reasonable attempts to determine and notify the owner have been made. If the owner of the animal cannot be located after reasonable efforts or the owner is located and notified but does not post, within 10 business days, the court-ordered security plus the costs reasonably incurred by the governmental animal control agency or humane society for housing and caring for the animal since its seizure, then the animal is deemed to have been abandoned and is forfeited to the governmental animal control agency or humane society for disposition. This bill removes these provisions as well.

[Tim Nunan]

http://endangeredowner.blogspot.com/200 ... -doug.html

Tennessee Sportsman Senator Doug Jackson Sponsors HSUS Anti Breeder Bill
How can a member of the Tennessee Legislative Sportsmen's Caucus (a group that looks out for the interests of hunters) ALIGN themselves with the BIGGEST ANTI HUNTING GROUP in the country???

By signing on as a sponsor of the HSUS driven TN Commercial Breeder Act, that's how.

It seems that Senator Doug Jackson has a conflict of interest going on here. On the one hand, he is a member of a group of dedicated to "protecting" the interests of hunters against ANTI hunting groups. While on the other hand, he has signed on as a sponsor of the TN anti breeder bill, pushed by the biggest ANTI hunting group of them all: The Humane Society of the United States.

Perhaps Senator Jackson doesn't realize that sportsmen and hunters keep and breed dogs? Perhaps Senator Doug Jackson didn't read the memo on which animal rights group (the Humane Society of the United States) is the BIGGEST ANTI HUNTING LOBBYING GROUP threatening U.S. sportsmen today?
"If we could shut down all sport hunting in a moment, we would." Wayne Pacelle, Senior VP Humane Society of the US (HSUS), formerly of Friends of Animals and Fund for Animals, Associated Press, Dec 30, 1991; "Only 7% of Americans are hunters. That means there are more of us than there are of them. It is simply a matter of democracy. The majority rules in a democracy. We are going to use the ballot box and the democratic process to stop all hunting in the United States... We will take it species by species until all hunting is stopped in California. Then we will take it state by state." (Full Cry magazine, October 1990)

I think Senator Jackson needs a refresher course on WHO the enemy really is. Perhaps polite email reminders of his apparent conflict of interest are in order?

As currently amended, the TN Commercial Breeder Act (SB258 HB386) will have a devastating impact on responsible sportsmen and hobby breeders:

"Commercial breeder" means any person who possesses or maintains under their immediate control twenty (20) or more adult female dogs for the purpose of the sale of their offspring as companion animals.

Just how will anyone PROVE to animal control or other inquiring entity, that one DOESN'T intend to sell the female's offspring? OR that one DOESN'T even intend to breed in the first place? The answer is: you can't.
Under this ill written bill, ANYONE that falls under this definition is GUILTY. It doesn't matter that someone would rather have intact animals vs sterilized ones. It doesn't matter that someone may have only had ONE litter in the past two years and KEPT the puppies for themselves and not for sale.
How does one prove these things? YOU CAN'T. This anti breeder bill has set the trap for sportsmen and hobby breeders alike. And with the help of Senator Doug Jackson. A person who has been entrusted to LOOK OUT for the interests of hunters in the state of Tennessee from ANTI hunting groups like the Humane Society of the United States.

And one more thing, sportsmen and Senator Jackson, this quote sums up the animal rights/anti hunting agenda pretty well:
"The entire animal rights movement in the United States reacted with unfettered glee at the Ban in England ...We view this act of parliament as one of the most important actions in the history of the animal rights movement. This will energise our efforts to stop hunting with hounds." Wayne Pacelle, CEO, Humane Society of the US (HSUS), London Times, December 26, 2004
The last time I checked there are dog breeders that breed hounds....hounds used to HUNT.