Quote:
Originally Posted by lecuyer  Hope this is ok to post..
--- In pet-law@yahoogroups.com, Walt <waltah@...> wrote:
The committee still doesn't understand how working dogs are bred and
selected: They don't understand that while many come from breeders of
purebreds, those individuals don't self-identify as breeders of dogs
for the specific purpose. Rather they breed the breed, and over some
period of time -- often two or more years -- the dogs sort out
according to their talents and get jobs accordingly. So how do you
know which breeders are actually breeding working dogs?
Walt Hutchens
Timbreblue Whippets |
I attended the hearing today. I was very pleased with the presentations of the opponents of the bill. One of the primary presenters came with graphs showing (I shall assume since the graphs were pointing toward the committee members and not the gallery) the disconnect between the statistics being touted by the proponents of the bill and the verifiable state collected statistics that show very different conclusions.
Douglas Serber was the primary speaker on working dogs. He did an excellent job on his piece making very good points. I spoke with him after the hearing and he said he met up with Senator Kehoe (the one that needed clarification on where police dogs come from) after the hearing and explained to her about where a large number of police dogs come from and how they would be considered "general pet owners" rather than the breeders. Douglas said he'd cleared up that issue. I was certain he would do just that and I'm glad to have been proven right.
I was impressed with the questions and concerns of all the members of the committee. Senator Harmon has had hunting dogs for years and understands the problem of sterilizing dogs long before they can be properly evaluated for their performance abilities. Sen. Harmon also asked about what it costs to spay/neuter a pet. (It might be good for some of us to fax copies of invoices of high cost s/n we have had to pay in the past.)
Senator Machado was concerned about having all these amendments added along the way to get it passed and then the possibility of those revisions getting pulled back out down the road. A very valid point, but Levine
promised that once the amendments were in, they would stay. Yeah. Sen. Machado made a great crack: He said, "Once these amendments are added are they there to stay or will they be cut out of the bill later (meaning the bill would be spayed/neutered)?"
Senator Cox was concerned about the practice of these amendments being added on the fly (Levine was very quick to offer to add more amendments to try to appease more opponents) without having the chance to evaluate them and come to an informed decision about them. I can certainly see his concern: A bill that they deliberate over and vote to pass on may well not end up anything like what they saw.
Chairwoman, Senator McLeod had a great little story about being a parent that has kids that have animals "follow" them home and then adopting them. She said they'd had dogs, cats, rabbits, chickens, etc. Every one of them (except the rabbits and chickens) were s/n. She considers herself a responsible pet owner and does not appreciate being told how to be a responsible pet owner. YEEHAW! I was SO happy to hear that!
I honestly think Levine would have had a heck of a time getting this through this group of senators. I think each and every one on this committee deserves a note of appreciation for their lucid comments and questions about the bill and for having given it a careful evaluation. I was very impressed.
Oh, I could also tell that the committee members were none too pleased that they were having to go through all of this when Levine already knew he was going to pull the bill. I think it's good the meeting was held anyway because there were very good presentations made by the opponents. Also, the general consensus was that the proponents knew it was going to be pulled well in advance because their numbers were very diminished at this hearing. So, the great majority of the turnout were the opponents. And that is a powerful sight to see.
Sorry this got so long.