Proposition B that places new regulations on dog breeders was approved by voters Nov. 3, but because it is a statutory change, it can be amended by the state legislature without a vote of the people.

“We could repeal the whole process,” said Senator-elect Mike Parson, who is now 133rd District Representative. “But that’s not practical and not going to happen, probably.”

What could happen, though, are changes to some of the language in the legislation. Parson said he wants to make changes to keep from putting reputable business owners out of business. One change is to remove the limit of the number of breeding dogs allowed in a breeding facility. The legislation set the limit at 50.

“We as a state shouldn’t be setting numbers for anything, whether it’s dogs, cattle or cell phones,” Parson said. “I will do everything I can to make changes to that legislation.”

Historically, the legislature has not amended statutory changes approved by voters because they do not want to go against the opinion of a majority of voters. While Parson said he does agree with that philosophy, he said this legislation is different.

“We had people from out-of-state fund a $6 million advertising campaign to give false information to people to pass this,” he said. “If this was a voter-initiated petition, that’s one thing. They took an emotional hot-button issue of animal abuse. In that legislation, you give more rights to animals than people.”

Sue Entlicher, Representative-elect for the 133rd District, said the legislature needs to look at making some changes.

“I think it needs a second look,” she said. “In this county alone, we have so many dog breeders.”

Mike Kelley, Representative-elect for the 126th District, wants changes made.

“I believe an outright repeal of Proposition B is unlikely in that it might trigger a veto from Governor [Jay] Nixon,” he wrote in a Prop B discussion board on his Facebook page. “I do think there are some areas which could be tweaked, such as the 50 dog limit and mandatory veterinary care for minor issues.”

The provisions of the proposition are to become effective Nov. 3, 2011.

(8) comments

Daveye

I'm just curious... how many people who commented on this article live in Polk County, or the state of Missouri for that matter?

barbara

Responsible breeders do not have hundreds of breeding dogs.. A responsible breeder wants to keep the blood lines of the breed clean. they breed out genitic defects. They care about their breeding dogs, and want to know who is getting the puppies of their breeding dogs. They dont sell their puppies to brokers or stores. They are responsible breeders.
" Breeders" in Missouri are in it for the money. They have hundreds of dogs and do not care about any of them. They are a cash crop and that is all. they do not want to spend the money to bring their kennels up to a basic standard for the dogs. They are the ones crying foul. Not the responsible breeders.
Wake up Missouri legislators. You are know around the world as The puppy mill capital. Ever wonder why????

barbara

Shame on the legislators. Wanting to deny basic needs of the breeding dogs. clean conditions,Shelter, excerise, food, clean water and vet care. How dare they want to change anything in the bill. The people have spoken. We still live in a democracy don't we? Dogs are not products. They feel pain, hunger,thirst sick. They are flesh and blood.
Shame on you all. I hope the people rise up and let you know how wrong you all are.

aniefrench

The people of Missouri have spoken, the only problem is that they were given false information on which to make their decision. We have more inspectors in Missouri than in any other state and some of the strictest dog breeding laws . Even the ballot was unfair, making it sound like if you didn't vote for Prop B the dogs would not get needed feed, water and vet care. We already have strict laws on all of these things. Prop B gives weaker standards than what we already had in place. Current law requires feed twice a day. By Prop B laws, all animals would have to be on ground level, solid flooring. That would be so much LESS healthy than what most licensed breeders have now. Kennels were just recently required by the Mo. Dept of Ag. and USDA to have half inch square, plastic coated wire, so that the feces and urine would drop from the cage. Licensed breeders just spent enormous amounts of money to meet these requirements, many building brand new facilities. If dogs were required to be on solid flooring, they would be down in their own waste all of the time. Most kennels started with their dogs on ground level and were just forced to change their facilites to meet the new standards(half inch plastic coated wire) .At least this was a health benefit for the animal, as they are out of their own waste, clean, warm and dry. To ask people to spend enormous amounts of money to change back to what they currently had is unfathomable.(There is a kennel operator within 10 miles of me who recently spent thousands of dollars to rennovate her kennel with half inch platic coated wire, as the inspectors asked her to. Now they are asking her to spends enormous amounts of money again to change back to what she currently had) Current law requires a vet to check each kennel yearly, so the animals are seen by a vet yearly and more often if they have health issues. Puppies have to have a vet check to be sold. The current space requirements for a dog are: a square the length of the dog plus six inches. By the new prop, the smallest dog has to have 12 sq feet inside and 24 sq feet outside. That space requirement alone would put almost every kennel out of business. For example, my $30,000 dog building that currently holds 75 dogs by USDA standards, would only hold 8.5 by proposition B standards. To be able to have a building that would house 50 dogs you would have to have a $150,000 dog building and $50,000 in concrete work. Many kennels have put up new facilities that they put up in accordance with the law and that they will never be able to pay for if Prop B goes into law as it is worded. I personally know people who have raised dogs most of their lives, it is their only income. When I asked the elderly lady what they would do, she said, " I guess we will go on welfare." At the very least, kennels that were built according to current laws should be grandfatered in.
Proposition B does not contain one thing that would be healtier for the dogs. It just makes it impossible for kennels to meet the conditions and earn a profit!
All of these pitiful pictures that you see on the internet and t.v. are from unlicensed kennels or kennels from out of the country. The unlicensed kennels will just keep on producing unhealthy, illegal puppies, as before, while the licensed kennels will be put out of business. Does that make any sense, punish the law abiding citizen while you let the criminal off scott free. Probably many licensed kennels will turn in their licenses in and become unlicensed kennels, out of self preservation, and the government will no longer be able to check them without a warrant. Dogs in the wild would be bred every heat cycle. Why wouldn't it be healthy for a kennel dog? Most dogs don't even breed every 6 months. I let my females and males run together all of the time and the majority of the dams only breed every 8 or 9 months, especially after they are a couple of years old. Once again, this is not about the dog, it is about making it difficult for the kennel owner, as that would require a lot of organization and keeping males and femals apart for a set length of time.
If people truely love dogs, they will want this law repealed, because it will become virtually impossible to get a pet if this sort of law sweeps the nation. Most people are not going to raise dogs if there is not a profit. Quickly, the right to have a pet will be something for the ultrarich. It makes me so sad to think of all of the children who will be denied the enjoyment of a dog or cat.
The most dangerous part of this prop is line 9. It does not say dog or cat like the rest of the prop. It only says animal: any pet in the home or close to the home. If this Prop stands like it is written now, it can legally be used to limit every animal humans own!!!!!!!!
I have raised dogs for 10 plus years and the biggest problems with dog production are:
1. We need one governing body, as the USDA and Mo Dept of Ag are not always in agreement. ( I recently had an USDA inspector tell me to put solid flooring all over the floors of my puppy pens. Of course this was a grose, feces mess and when the Mo inspector came, they told me I couldn't have all solid flooring, that was unhealthy.) Even though we have not had changes in current law for years, every time the inspectors came they would tell you that things you had been doing for years needed to be changed. If we had one governing body, they could decide exactly what needed to be done and enforce it, instead of kennels having to make all of these unneccesary, expensive changes all of the time.
2. The unlicensed kennels need to be shut down. The Mo Dept of Ag has a program in place, to do this, but not enough funding. Prop B does not help facilitate this progam in any way. The current law need to be enforced everywhere!!!! It needs more funding.

berrdog

The sick, coughing, poorly bred puppy that ends up at the vet is from a "breeder," the new owners were told. By way of a pet store. The paperwork shows the truth: the "breeder" is a puppy factory in Missouri, or Kansas, or Arkansas. "He has papers," the still-confident new owners say. Yes, they sure are printed on paper, those credentials of his. They'll do well at the bottom of a cage.
Repeat this scenario a few dozen or more times in the course of a year at any given animal hospital in the Northeast. In the end, after the illnesses are treated, the poor little animal may grow up to a reasonably healthy representative of its breed and a good pet, but the odds of this are worsened by virtue of where it came from. Hopefully the pup won't have inherited any number of congenital diseases or deformities which careless breeding can propagate. No, Mr. Parson, this legislation is not intended to give more rights to animals than people; it is an animal welfare issue. Dogs deserve better than to live their entire lives in a cage, and to be bred on every single heat cycle. They deserve routine health care and good nutrition. How much attention can a "breeder" pay to each breeding female when they have more than fifty of them? How many responsible breeders have this many dogs?

SaveTheDogs

It's a very telling comment that Representative Mike Parson compared dogs to cell phones. Dogs are not a commodity. They suffer and have tremendous needs emotionally as well as physically. Dog breeding in Missouri needs to scale back and stop contributing to the millions of unwanteds that are killed every year.

It's ludicrous to discount any legislation approved by "city folk" who buy your sickly puppy mill dogs and end up stuck with the bill to clean up messes left by shoddy operators. And those "outsiders" like HSUS are left cleaning up your messes as well.

STOP BREEDING SO MANY DOGS MISSOURI - IT'S A DISGRACE

purpleminipins

I completely agree whenever people can't use their own common sense anymore as to wether to take a hurt or injured animal to the vet then i think it's high time that somebody steps in and says no these animals do not deserve this abuse. I use the word animals because personally i think it should be that way on all animals if you cant afford to take care of them and treat them good then you don't deserve them. I think that it's time for us to stand up for the ones that can't speak for themselves.

PetVet

The people have spoken and they don't want this great state to be known as the puppy mill capital of the world. Responsible breeders should have no problem with the approved legislation because it protects the welfare of the dogs. Parson's comparison of puppies to cell phones is a perfect illustration of why better safguards are needed for these future familiy members. What a shame (but hardly a surprise) that only a few days after the election politicians are already lining up to do the bidding of the breeding industry's lobbyists.

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.