In the puppy mill debate, even a few veterinarians don’t get it

Last week a veterinarian wrote an editorial that appeared in the Joplin Globe.

She writes about Proposition B in Missouri, which sets reasonable guidelines for breeders, such as cage sizes, minimum veterinary care, access to exercise outside and limits the number of breeding dogs each breeder can house.

And as this DVM notes, there is an upper and lower range of temperatures for the kennels – from 45 to 85 degrees. She notes some breeds might be adversely impacted by the minimum range, while others won’t do well at 85 degrees.

The regulation set basic ranges, so that the breeders will not allow the temperatures to drop BELOW or rise ABOVE these levels. The vet’s statement really suggests some breeders don’t know what they’re doing and will not be able to work WITHIN the range for the breed they are working with.

But she goes on to state – “” Good breeders understand these needs and work to maintain them for the sake of their dogs and puppies. “”

So we’re back to regulating the bad breeders, which is exactly what Prop B sets out to do. It would be easy enough to add specific guidelines within the ranges for specific breeds.

This is the only example cited in the piece and yet she states “Prop B is a misguided and flawed.” She says we have to do more to protects dogs (good) and put puppy mills out of business (good) and protect good breeders (okay, fine). But she fails to explain how Prop B might negatively impact good breeders. It won’t. As she reminds us, the good breeders already meet or exceed the guidelines.

Prop B is not flawed. But her argument is flawed.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: