Missouri Wants to Keep Puppy Mills in Business, Despite Passing Prop B

On November 2, Missourians cast their votes and passed Prop B, the Puppy Mill Cruelty Prevention Act, a citizen initiative brought to voters to stand up for dogs languishing in puppy mills in their state. Unfortunately, legislators are already working to kill this new law.

Missourians for the Protection of Dogs, a coalition formed by animal protection organizations, businesses, veterinarians, and citizens, hit the streets educating people about the atrocities inherent to puppy mills, such as cramped conditions, dogs being trapped in their own filth and sick and injured dogs being left with no veterinary care to name a few.

Over 190,000 signatures were delivered to the Secretary of State in Missouri to get Prop B on November’s ballot in the country’s worst state for puppy mills. With an estimated 3000 puppy mills licensed by the USDA and the Missouri Department of Agriculture, it’s been called the puppy mill capital of America.

Weak laws regulating commercial kennels have made it the perfect place for unscrupulous breeders to call home. According to the ASPCA, Missouri supplies over 40 percent of the puppies you can find in pet stores across the country.

Prop B, which will take effect in 2011, isn’t anything outlandish. The bill calls for an increase in standard care, including providing food and water, vet care, protection from the elements, exercise, “constant and unfettered access” to the outdoors, room to move around and stretch and rest between breeding cycles. It would apply to breeders with more than 10 dogs and limit the number of breeding dogs to 50 per facility. Violations would result in up to 15 days in jail and a fine of $300.

Prop B calls for nothing more than adequate care for an animal we fondly, and commonly, refer to as man’s best friend. Missourians spoke. They don’t like puppy mills. Prop B passed with 51.6 percent of the votes. Unless they do math differently in Missouri than they do everywhere else, that’s the majority. End of story, right?

Unfortunately, no. It took less than a week for opponents to start coming out of the woodwork trying to get Prop B watered down or repealed.

Breeders of course heard a resounding ca-ching as the new law would significantly raise the cost of running a commercial breeding facility, while others in agribusiness are worried that regulations will expand to livestock. The Tea Party was, of course, also upset.

Worse, legislators are listening and will be discussing possible actions in the new session starting January 5.

“We will start working on that issue probably immediately,” said Senator-elect Mike Parson, a Bolivar Republican. Incidentally, there are 150 licensed breeders in his district.

Rep. Tom Loehner, a Koeltztown Republican who is chairman of the House Agriculture Policy Committee said that the whining heard about the issue in rural areas could “represent a mandate for change,” as most of the votes came from urban areas.

Not to be a smarty pants, but those votes all count the same whether or not the came from rural or urban areas.

Additional concerns were raised over job loss and the potential for Prop B to put legitimate breeders out of business. However, Barbara Schmitz, spokeswoman for Missourians for the Protection of Dogs, brilliantly pointed out that Prop B would be economically beneficial by providing an increased demand for veterinary care, while simultaneously reducing the financial burdens of rescues and other funding allocated to the mistreatment of animals.

As for putting legitimate breeders out of business, what legitimate breeder needs more than 50 breeding dogs? That’s 50 litters of puppies per breeding cycle, yet we destroy millions of innocent dogs every year simply because there aren’t enough homes and Missouri wants to let their state continue to contribute to this horrendous industry churning out puppies like inanimate objects?

Please sign the petition asking Missouri legislators to keep Prop B!

Read more: animal cruelty, animal welfare, missouri, prop b, puppy mills

creative commons

quick poll

vote now!

Loading poll...

no!
leaning no
leaning yes
yes!

no!
leaning no
leaning yes
yes!

Disclaimer: The views expressed above are solely those of the author and may not reflect those of
Care2, Inc., its employees or advertisers.

9:34PM PDT on Apr 25, 2011

Thank you for the information.

send a green star

Barbara U.

10:17AM PST on Dec 8, 2010

Anytime there is a policy/law/whatever to be put in place for the benefit animals/wildlife/environment/pollution/health care, politicians and opponents (which always seem to be republicans), always oppose it for "economic" reasons.

Some things are just wrong, and you can not attach a price tag to it.

Economics is no reason to allow innocent creatures to be kept in horrible conditions, why not allow child prostition and meth labs if economics is a deciding factor?

I just don't understand why there is even a debate on this...

Amber B.

12:00PM PST on Dec 7, 2010

one Missouri state Senator was declared "Ass Clown of the Week" on the Riverfront Times, beating out "a conniving drug dealer, a disgruntled john and a discriminatory pension".

http://blogs.riverfronttimes.com/dailyrft/2010/12/bill_stouffer_puppy_mills_prop_b_dog_breeding.php

Carolyn F.

9:13AM PST on Dec 6, 2010

better keep an eye on Pennsylvania folks, the Amish have started puppy mills in that state too. Guess they figured if it got too hot for them in Missouri and Kansas, they would move over to a less noticable state. The Amish have always been highly regarded in a lot of areas, such as furniture etc. it is such a tragedy that the puppy mill business will end up being what they are best known for.

Monica L.

8:53AM PST on Dec 6, 2010

I adopted a 9 year old wheaten terrier three years ago. She was developing multiple health issues and after researching her papers, I found that she was a puppy mill puppy from the Missouri area. Her papers were processed across state lines making the search more difficult. She is now enjoying much improved health, but only after thousands of dollars of care. Puppy mills do not care about proper breeding. Inbreeding is common. Improper breeding in rampant. Proper care of the animals is nearly nonexistent. Shelters are full of animals with health issues due to this practice. IT MUST STOP NOW.

Ola C.

11:19PM PST on Dec 2, 2010

I can't believe it; but at the same time I know I should not be surprised that the politicians in MO want to dilute the bill. At first I was sad about it, now I am mad! It just occurred to me who is donating to theses state reps campaign funds? If it is the puppy mills or breeders someone with LOTS of public access should investigate and publish what they find.

Ed G.

10:18PM PST on Dec 2, 2010

Maybe its time to start boycotting *ALL* products made in Missouri and any companies doing buisness in Missouri.

Julianna D.

5:13PM PST on Dec 1, 2010

LMAO this prop would put "legitimate breeders" out of business, if these awsome breeders would go out of business for PROVIDING BASICS, then it seems to me they aren't "legitimate". This is rediculous- these people need to visit their local shelters and find out about how these "legitimate breeders" allow last years crop to be continually swept under the rug- as I doubt they accept returns when buyers can't keep puppies, forcing them to go to pounds.

Mark B.

4:39PM PST on Nov 30, 2010

I wish they'd shut down all those cruel Puppy Mills for good.

Catherine K.

9:56AM PST on Nov 30, 2010

If people would stop buying the product and adopt animals from shelters; problem solved. But that's like asking those idiots to stop hunting.