New Pennsylvania law to stop tail docking...

[JonandMichelle]

Cross posted from the ADOA...
Written by: Cathy Iacopelli

I am curious if any members know more about this proposed legislation, are there things left out, or are things being blown out of porportion? Thoughts?


PENNSYLVANIA -
Fwd: Pennsylvania Draft Legislation Puts Clamps on Tail Docking

This is pretty scary. Cross posted with permission.....
The second paragraph is potentially devastating to more than PA residents.
Please join ASDA and choose to make a difference. dlb

Pennsylvania Draft Legislation Puts Clamps on Tail Docking

A proposed revision of the Pennsylvania Animal Cruelty law makes it illegal
for anyone to own or possess a dog or puppy with a docked tail, unless the
person can prove that the tail was docked by a licensed veterinarian or has
filed an affidavit of proof with a county treasurer that the procedure was
done before the law goes into effect. This draft legislation will be
presented to the Dog Law Advisory Board this week, prior to being published
in The Pennsylvania Bulletin and submitted to the state Legislature.

The proposed law also would apply to nonresidents of Pennsylvania who are
passing through the state, or who participate in field trials, dog shows,
performance events or hunting here. Several sporting breeds routinely have
their tails docked, following breed standards designed to prevent severe
tail injuries while hunting, including Brittanys, German shorthaired
pointers, cocker spaniels, various breeds of terriers and several others.
Many other breeds that customarily have their tails docked are as diverse as
Australian shepherds, Yorkshire terriers and rottweilers.

Animal cruelty statutes carry criminal penalties, and in Pennsylvania are
enforced by Humane Society officers, county animal control officers and
police officers. The proposed legislation also grants power to state dog
wardens to enforce all animal cruelty statutes.

The American Sporting Dog Alliance (ASDA) is actively working to oppose this
legislation. We need your support and membership right now to show
Pennsylvania lawmakers that sporting dog owners are united in opposition to
this arbitrary infringement of our rights and breed traditions. Please visit
our website to learn about us and join our fight to protect your rights:
Main Page @ americansportingdogalliance.org.

This legislation will be introduced to accompany a major 80-page-long
revision of Pennsylvaniaâ?Ts kennel laws. Both bills are supported by Gov.
Ed Rendell. ASDA will be issuing commentary about the tough new kennel
legislation in the near future.

ASDA maintains that this legislation quite literally would create chaos and
result in stiff fines for many thousands of law-abiding dog owners every
year. While licensed kennel owners may be informed at some point, few pet
owners would have a way of knowing about the law until a dog warden shows up
at their door with a citation. Perhaps the most vulnerable people would be
pet owners and hunters who own one or two dogs, but donâ?Tt participate in
events or organizations that would inform them of this law. We see the
potential for millions of dollars in unfair and unjustified fines to be
sucked out of the pockets of law-abiding private citizens to feed the greedy
jaws of government.

If passed into law, this legislation also would have a devastating impact on
field trials, performance testing and shows for many breeds. Nonresidents
simply would not be able to comply with a requirement, which would require
having a veterinary certificate or registering the dog with a county
treasurer in Pennsylvania.

Most people who buy a dog or puppy have no way of knowing if a veterinarian
has docked the tail, but simply have taken a breeder at his or her word when
proof has not been required by law. They also may not be able to contact
someone elseâ?Ts veterinarian many months or years after the fact to obtain
proof. Some people also may be trapped by this law if a veterinarian has
retired, moved or died, or if the dogâ?Ts breeder cannot be located. Even
after being cited, these people would have no way to come into compliance in
the future, and would be given the painful choice of either facing
increasingly stiff penalties in the future or euthanizing their beloved pet
and companion. This legislation would turn thousands of law-abiding people
into criminals, at the stroke of a pen!

In addition, some dogs lose part or all of their tails through accidents and
injuries, and sometimes as newborn puppies. This can happen to a newborn
puppy if its mother steps on it or accidentally hurts its tail cleaning it
up after birth. Older dogs can get their tails caught in doors, or break
them by accidentally cracking them against hard objects. Owners of these
dogs would have no defense against being charged with animal cruelty.

The legislation also would seriously impact both Pennsylvania and
out-of-state trainers and handlers, who would be virtually prohibited from
bringing a dog with a docked tail into the state for a field trial or to be
trained. Many Pennsylvania residents also would be effectively prohibited
from buying a dog or puppy from a breeder of their choice from out of state,
even if the breeder was completely in compliance with the laws of his or her
own state.

Even travelers passing through Pennsylvania with their pets would be subject
to a criminal citation under this legislation.

Some conscientious and experienced breeders dock the tails of puppies, after
having been advised to do this and trained by their veterinarians. This
practice would be prohibited by the legislation. Many veterinarians report
that newly born puppies show no signs of pain or discomfort from docking
procedures, and some even sleep through the procedure.

A particularly onerous aspect of this legislation is that it places the
burden of proof on the person who owns a dog or is in possession of it,
rather than upon the state. This flies in the face of the entire American
system of jurisprudence, which is based on the presumption of innocence for
anyone who is accused of violating any law. These vital protections to
individual liberties are enshrined in the constitutions of the United States
and most states. No crime of any kind is more serious or dangerous to
American society than comprising the integrity of the Constitution and basic
human rights.

The legislation also includes similar prohibitions against debarking dogs,
performing caesarian sections to assist in birthing puppies, and cropping
ears.

ASDA is in complete support of the prohibitions in the legislation against
these procedures by anyone other than a licensed veterinarian. We feel that
it is completely inappropriate for anyone except a licensed veterinarian to
perform these procedures.

However, ASDA opposes placing the burden of proof on the dog owner, trainer
or handler of the dog. We believe that legal liability should be limited to
the person who owned the dog at the time the procedures were performed, and
that the burden of proof should lie with the state.

[greatdane]

I believe puppies feel the docking of their tail , how could they not?
it is basic animal rigths to have it done humanely and if this covers some loophole then that's fine by me. I guess I would wait and see some more clarification on this law, can't believe that it will prohibit anybody from taking their dogs to PA for field trial etc.
just my 2 cents worth.

[cerulean]

I agree with this legislation, because it will be one more way to fight BYBs and puppymills. A procedure like this SHOULD be done by a vet. People can learn to carry the proof along with all the dog's other appropriate papers such as vaccination records.

Even those dogs who lose their tail by an accident should be take to a vet to treat the injury, so the owner would still have the vet's proof.

The proposed legislation also grants power to state dog wardens to enforce all animal cruelty statutes... more power to shut down irresponsible breeders.

Now, how on earth can we expect the state to be responsible for proof ?? Americans need to learn to be responsible and not make excuses, we hate to pay taxes but we want the government to take care of our problems.
Americans think it's a "right" to do whatever we darn well please, no matter what the cost to our cilvilization (ownership of automatic weapons, for instance)... but I say these are priviledges that come with responsibilities, I don't think this law infringes on any "rights".

What about the C-section part of the law, that seems like a health issue to save the life of the mother-bitch ???

[Inga]

I agree. Anything they can do to stop or hinder puppy mills is great. Pennsylvania has huge issues with puppy mills from what I understand.

[Kandi]

To a certain extent, I think they are overstepping their boundaries, while at the same time, as a responsible owner,perhaps someday breeder, I would have a vet dock my tails. But, what about the out of state puppies. Both my girls were shipped in, and both had their tails done before I got them. One was done by the vet, the other, I believe a breeder did it, but they have been in the breed for years, and know what they are doing.
But I also think it leaves a bit of gray area for them to someday say, no tail docking. I like my girls without their tails, and prefer that for all my future dogs as well, JMO. I think it would be a big mistake to let that law pass through only in that how it may affect the future, and out of staters.

[royalarrival]

My current understanding of the law is docking of tails and ears must be done by a vet. Problem is forcing this law is impossible. Just like registering your dog with your local county is a law, but impossible to completely inforce. C-sections...I can not imagine someone doing this in their home. Working for a vet, just about every weekend is a C-section or two. Most are scheduled (English Bulldogs), but some are ER cases.

I am familiar with the legislation that Rendell is pushing for, but don't recall seeing the tail docking, ears, C-section stuff in it. I will have to do some research on this part.

The main push is to toughen the laws for kennels/breeders in order to weed out the puppymills. There is a big up roar due to this. Kennels and breeders that state they are not a puppymill will hurt financially due to the regulations if the law is passed. The law will require a certain kennel size per dog as well as certain requirements for the outside play/run area. There are more to regulations for the housing provided, exercise per dog per day, documentation per dog of health, vaccines, exercise etc.. The big up roar is where they are stating the kennel size (amount of dogs) and up will apply to this law. It is a low # of dogs (can't remember off top of my head) which will impact the small breeders that work out of the home. They claim they do not have the financial means to make the changes to their kennel to abide by this law. It will put them out of business. They state the # of dogs in a kennel should be increased to effect the businesses the law is being pushed for in the first place...to weed out puppymills. They also have issues with the regulations like documentation of each dog per day of exercise.

IMO, If they are true to their breed and are honest in running a legit business, they have nothing to fear. Choke up the money to make the changes needed. So it takes 3 seconds to document the exercise time of each dog....big deal. Nurses, DR, Assistants at hospitals (encluding vet hospitals) must document everything from poop, to exercise and what they eat (including how much).

Again, I have not heard anything about pushing to toughen up on the tail docking and stuff. I will have to research this and see if they are adding anything different to the current law they are trying to pass.

[poohbearsmom]

Be careful folks.... while I understand that the bringing about of legislation like this is due to the horrid conditions of the puppy mills which abound in PA, we really need to think about the entire ramifications of simply backing this up because of the puppy mills.

I do NOT want the government telling me what I can and cannot do to my property ... do you?

When we allow the government to 'enforce' decisions like this that essentially make you guilty until you can prove yourself innocent, they also open the door to other, even more scary bits of legislation.... we want to maintain dogs in the category of "property" that we "own"... we do not want to merely be considered guardians - we then lose many more rights down the road.

Make me responsible for what I do, not my neighbor.

[fbkeays]

This is more AR crap, that is all that it is. I have seen a litter of rottweilers docked. The person doing it wasn't a vet. She came to the breeder's house on the evening of the second day. She made sure that the puppies were full of milk and sleepy. She did the dock so quickly the pups truely didn't know what had happened to them. All the pups did was yawn and stretch before being placed back with their mother. Mom was fine with it all being done a few feet away from her. No stress and no trauma.
I have talked to a few vets, my own included about docking rottweiler puppies. My own vet said that she would do tails, but that I would not like them because she has never been comfortable about doing them as close as is required. Another vet said that she doesn't feel comfortable about doing tails. A third vet said that she needs a couple of assistants to hold the puppies and doesn't allow the mother to leave the car due to the stress and trauma.
It seems to me that the vets/inexperience are the cause of the stress and trauma, not the actual procedure. Puppies are born immature. Their nervous system is not fully developed. When I breed my first litter, I will not take them to the vet for docking. I will call in this experienced person to do it. If this law passes before that happens, I guess I can never even do a road trip through PA because I will not have proof of a vet done procedure.
I don't think I should ever have to prove that I am not cruel to my dogs. How can I prove a negative? That is what this law is, putting the burend of proof of a negative on the individual and not on the state. That is like the question, "Mr. Jones, when did you stop beating your wife?" Questions like those are not allowed in a court of law in this country.
There is also a federal law that requires states to recognize/accept laws in other states. That is how a couple that are married in one start are still married in another state. The same goes for driver's license. My CA driver's license is valid in other states.
If PA wants to outlaw tail docking by non vets, they can. But they can't fine me for driving through their state with my dogs unless they have a witness willing to testify in court and have a warrant to that effect that they saw a non vet dock my dog INSIDE PA borders.
This law is afront and insult to every American and should not be tolarated by anyone as a "good" thing. Anyone who thinks so, should move to China or Singapore. Once this is accepted, it is a very small step to complete government control of our lives. The amount of laws that are being supported already in the name of Home Security is infuriating.

[royalarrival]

I just read the dog draft law (my eyes are bugged out). No where does is state about tail docking and all that stuff.

It does require documentation. Kennels must be licensed. Anyone harboring, selling, buying of 26 dogs or more of any age in a years time must apply for the license. Through information you give, they will classify you to a kennel group. Licensed kennels can not harbor, sell, buy and transport dogs from an unlicensed kennel. Any dog entering Pa from out of state/commonwealth must have a health certificate. New dogs entering a licensed kennel must show proof of health certificate, documentation where the dog came from and discription of dog. The dog must be quarintined until given approval by a licensed Vet. All Licensed kennels must keep records of each dog that enters the facility for up to two years. (meaning if a dog enters the kennel and only stays for 4 wks you must keep info of the dog for 2 years) The breed, age, marking, sex, health, where it came from, where it went to, date it entered and left the kennel.
Documentation of exercise must be noted for each dog in kennel. 20 minutes per day per dog. Notation of a leash work or play run must be noted as well.

The kennel size requirements will be larger. They have certain requirements for outside facilities and inside facilities. Lighting and electrical requirements. Ventilation and drainage requirements. Footing requirements to prevent muddy areas. List goes on. I don't see anything about tail docking.

[royalarrival]

Originally Posted by poohbearsmom

Be careful folks.... while I understand that the bringing about of legislation like this is due to the horrid conditions of the puppy mills which abound in PA, we really need to think about the entire ramifications of simply backing this up because of the puppy mills.

I do NOT want the government telling me what I can and cannot do to my property ... do you?

When we allow the government to 'enforce' decisions like this that essentially make you guilty until you can prove yourself innocent, they also open the door to other, even more scary bits of legislation.... we want to maintain dogs in the category of "property" that we "own"... we do not want to merely be considered guardians - we then lose many more rights down the road.

Make me responsible for what I do, not my neighbor.

I do completely understand what you are saying. I also agree, but unfortunately PA stinks when it comes to dog laws and enforcing them!

In a 5 mile radius from my home, there are 3 puppymills that I know of. Shelters are full. Non kill shelters have a long waiting list for those that need to find a new home for their pet. Every week there are is at least one story of cruelity case that managed to make the newspaper.

Through my years of working w/animals, I got to meet a special rottie that happened to still have his tail. The owner adopted him from the local humane society where he volunteered at. He had to fight for the rottie (named Pookie). The humane society claimed the rottie was unadoptable due to the fact he had a tail. No one wants a rottie w/a tail. His time was up and they have to make room for more. He was scheduled to be euthanized. The owner stated his interest in adopting the rottie. The humane society said he worked odd hours and would not be a good home for him. He contacted the president and stated his concern w/threatening to take it to the public as well as involving his lawyer. End result...He has Pookie, but no longer helps out at the shelter. I was the one who cared for Pookie while the owner was working his odd hours.

It is a vicious cycle when dealing with irresponsible owners, breeders, shelters in PA. Shelters are doing what they can. But more and more dogs are pouring in.

[cerulean]

THANK YOU, royalarrival for being the voice of reason and actually getting the FACTS straight. I'll bet that the "authorities" won't have time or money or desire to bother the small and legit breeders.... they will use these toothier laws to go after the major offenders (puppymills, places that citizens complain about etc.)

Nonetheless, I have no sympathy for those who claim to be legit breeders but don't want to pay for a minimum size of kennel or exercise time. Any legit business keeps routine daily records, and PULLEASE, if they were really legit breeders they would WANT decent healthy-sized kennels.

Thanks again for reading the tome for us....

[royalarrival]

Rendell cleaned house in the animal cruelity department. New people are holding the positions as well as new positions added to enlarge the force to prevent/shut down cruelty and puppymills. Again, if the law passes, I will not hold my breath to see how well it is enforced. That is yet to be determined. In this new law, there are also admendments to clarify certain exsisting laws where clarity was not given. Also to strenghten exsisting laws. They are adding appeal rights to owners of vicious dogs in cases where the vicious dog caused harm/distruction to others. Abandonment laws to those that do not adhear to their responsibility in cases like vicious dogs/or unlicensed kennels. Shelters will be exempt to adhear to the kennel size. They are temporaryly harboring and doing a community service. To require them to adhear to the new kennel size will limit their ability to shelter dogs (which will be utilized in cases where dogs are removed from kennels/cruelity cases). They will have to adhear to the documentation aspect of the law and exercise. Also, every dog that is in a shelter must be licensed before it leave w/the adopter. The shelter facility must have proof that the adopter licensed the dog.

[cerulean]

Thanks. The shelter exemptions make sense. I wonder how these laws compare to the other states ?? I hope we can do more to help....

[royalarrival]

Anything in PA would be an improvement compared to other states. I know there are a few states like PA that are behind in dog laws as well as enforcing them. The new kennel size regulation will comply with the nation wide organization (I forget the name) recommendation that most follow. Again, the law means nothing if it is not enforced.

[lilybug]

I understand that they are trying to protect animals from cruel practices.. However, if they are worried about puppy mills, then why can they not be inspected such as restaurants are. If you are a breeder with registered animals then you should be inspected. I think if they cracked down on current laws that would be better. I dont agree with the tail docking for the simple reason I rescued my Rottie as an adult. How am I to know how she got her tail docked? What am I suppose to do if I decided to take her there to visit? I think this law will also make it harder for rescue groups to find homes forthe dogs with docked tails because of the hassle of proving the docking of the tail. Also, hwo is a person to prove if they had to dock tails. Some breeds such as Aussie's have a chance of being born with a natural docked tail. So who can prove whether it was or not? I think that cracking down on pet store conditions and breeder conditions is a better way to help.