Wednesday, September 18, 2013

APHIS Final Rule Revising Pet Seller Exemptions and You

SAOVA Friends,

As  you know by now, APHIS published the Final Rule September 10, 2013 which revises the definition of "retail pet store" under the Animal Welfare Act (AWA) licensing and regulations. The new definition of retail pet store means a place of business or residence where the seller, buyer, and animal are physically present in the same location. Not only dogs, but cats, rabbits, mice, small exotic animals, and other small pets will no longer be sold at retail without either public or APHIS oversight.  If you cannot qualify for the retail pet store exemption in the AWA by selling only face-to-face, then you must either obtain a federal license or be limited to 4 or fewer females bred and raised on your premises. This limit of 4 is an aggregate number of females regardless of species (i.e., 2 dogs, 1 cat, 1 rabbit).

The transaction does not have to take place at the seller’s home.  A meeting place can be set up to transfer the animal. However, everyone needs to be aware that many municipalities have ordinances restricting sales in public places and should plan accordingly. It appears APHIS will allow a third party to be designated as the agent to stand in for the breeder or buyer in the face-to-face transaction, but this needs additional clarification.

Anyone selling dogs for hunting, breeding, security purposes, or as working dogs is excluded from the definition of Dealer and from the definition of Retail Pet Store.

APHIS held a teleconference to announce the final rule.  If you could not attend, we urge you to read the transcribed call which is posted at the SAOVA website http://tinyurl.com/nyb4s5g

In general, APHIS says this rule is driven by purpose of breeding and method of delivery for the sale; and that their goal is only to end sight-unseen sales.  However, since breeding programs do not fall into nice neat categories, and scenarios change from breeder to breeder and species to species, covering the retail sector with such a regulation creates many areas of uncertainty for the average breeder.

The list of questions is long:

Can hunting dog kennel owners sell pets
Can breeders ship sight-unseen where relationships have been well established
Can litters be whelped inside the house
Are rescues still exempt if they ship sight-unseen
Can animals, other than rabbits, be shipped for preservation of the species
Do the APHIS regulations take precedence over state license regulations
How can we believe the answers from APHIS staff who do not understand the questions
Does APHIS plan to offer any protection for newly licensed breeders so that kennel photos are not added to the ASPCA “puppy mill” data base and other sensationalized uses
If you are reported to APHIS as needing a license, are investigators required to have a warrant to enter your premises
Is everyone on the same premise required to be licensed if one person must be licensed

The rule is overly complicated, inconsistent, and certainly not easy to understand. The internet and chat groups are full of conversation about this rule with a number of interpretations and a wide variety of opinions being circulated.  APHIS also posted another Question and Answer Fact Sheet with their explanations to some of the major concerns submitted during the rule making process.  Again as last year, the Q&A contains many half, incomplete, or misleading answers.  The reality is that the final interpretation of the rule and its definitions will be at the discretion of APHIS inspectors and staff.  

Rather than attempt to analyze the rule and/or interpret how it will impact hundreds of thousands of breeders in dozens of varying situations we’ll review what we do know regarding the new rule and current AWA standards.

The Final Rule was published in the Federal Register September 18, 2013 and is effective 60 days from publication. APHIS plans a phased implementation of the rule. Kevin Shea, APHIS Director, stated in the teleconference, “We will be trying to identify the facilities that aren't currently licensed that should be licensed under the rule. We'll be doing this, using publicly available data - breed registries, advertisements that folks are doing on the internet, etc., to identify the facilities that we need to approach about getting licensed.”  APHIS is still finalizing their “outreach” plan and we will share that information when it becomes available.

The AWA Standards of Care for housing, facilities, exercise, cleaning, sanitization, employees, housekeeping, and pest control will not be revised.

Living under USDA licensing is NOT an option for the average home-based retail seller. The average house cannot be converted to a USDA compliant facility. Federal standards for licensed facilities dictate sanitation measures not feasible in a normal home, surfaces that are impervious to moisture, ventilation, bio-hazard control, veterinary care, exercise, temperature controls, waste disposal systems, diurnal lighting, drainage systems, washrooms, perimeter fencing, as well as transportation standards for regulated animals.

We are very concerned about the Q&A section regarding use of your homes. The answer is disingenuous and we trust those who have read it do not believe they can continue utilizing their homes once they are licensed.  The revised APHIS Q&A asks the question: Will regulated breeders who keep their dogs in their homes have to put them in a kennel?  APHIS answers “generally not” and proceeds with a misleading explanation that APHIS will determine if your home meets their standards; and states that a number of currently licensed wholesale breeders maintain their animals in their homes.

IF you can give up a room in your house and convert it to be the moisture proof, sterile environment described above, AND gain approval from an APHIS inspector, you may be able to crate or pen animals in that room. This room would then be for either adults or puppies/kittens but not both. Under the USDA standards puppies and kittens under 4 months of age cannot be housed in the same primary enclosure with adults, other than the dam/queen or foster dam/queen. Since the remainder of your house does not meet the above requirements, allowing animals to roam freely would cause you to be in violation of the AWA. And unless your bedroom is coated in epoxy and has a floor drain, you won’t be doing any whelping there.

A separate facility will be needed for females by two weeks prior to whelping. Even if you make one room in your house compliant with the AWA standards, females cannot be whelped in that room. That means an additional room will be required, plus one for each additional litter within the next 3.5 months.

Any room in your home used for whelping or birthing must meet USDA standards – impervious to moisture – meaning tile floor and vinyl-coated walls.

All surfaces touched by animals must be waterproof and sterilized every two weeks with your choice of live steam under pressure, 180 degree water and detergent with disinfectant, or a combination detergent/disinfectant product.

You must have a separate food preparation area from your kitchen.

In addition to a written exercise plan and veterinary plan you must now have an emergency plan that documents your awareness and understanding of your responsibility to protect your animals in emergency situations.

The USDA license may classify you as a commercial business. You will need to know the allowed uses for your property in the current zoning and land use regulations and whether home businesses are allowed. Your property tax status may be affected and your tax liabilities could change, depending on state and local laws.

Finally, your information, photos of your property, and inspection reports will be the subject of Freedom of Information Act requests by activists.  Inspectors will always write you up for something or it looks as if they are not doing their jobs, thus giving activists something to read and complain about.  Activists are not above taking the information out of context and using it to suit their purposes.

The new rule centers on shipping sight-unseen which at this time presents unanswered questions, and could target you for investigation as to whether you need a license.  Until APHIS issues meaningful dialogue on their intentions and we know how inspectors should interpret the new rule, it might be best to delay use of commercial shipping if possible.  If you have more than four females, rely on shipping to keep your program viable, and have no alternative options, then you will have to contact USDA and ask for an application kit and begin the licensing process.

When you contact APHIS with questions, record the answers.   If you make the decision to go forward and apply for a license, record the conversations and the inspections and have a witness with you during the pre-licensing process.

It is impossible to predict the full impact and potential damage on breeders once this rule is actually in place and enforcement begins.  In the meantime, please do not start reducing your kennels, catteries, and small businesses, and jeopardize the years of hard work that went into building your breeding programs.  There is more to learn on this rule and what can be done so that we can continue to pursue our hobbies, avocations, and livelihoods.  Many people are working on your behalf and we will not go down quietly.

Cross posting is encouraged.

Susan Wolf
Sportsmen's & Animal Owners' Voting Alliance
Working to Identify and Elect Supportive Legislators
saova@earthlink.net

Thursday, August 15, 2013

MO Supreme Court Decision - MoFed wins

Missouri Federation of Animal Owners (MoFed) has received word that the Supreme Court of the State of Missouri just handed down its decision on the HSUS vs. State of Missouri concerning shelter fees for shelters and rescues. The Supreme Court agreed with the lower court and ruled against HSUS in their effort to relieve licensed humane societies and shelters of paying the same fees as dog breeders in Missouri.

MoFed presented the idea in the state legislature and then Representative Brian Munzlinger attached the language to the omnibus agriculture bill several years ago. HSUS immediately filed a lawsuit which was ruled against all the way to the State Supreme Court. The 7 to 0 decision today is yet another defeat for HSUS!

MoFed held its ground and refused to let HSUS' attempts to pass legislation to circumvent the rulings of the courts. Defeating the efforts of HSUS in both the legislature and courts of Missouri is another win for animal owners and another sound defeat for HSUS!!! Read the Ruling

Thursday, July 11, 2013

Legislation Briefs and PUPS Update July 11, 2013


SAOVA Friends,

This will be a busy month for the members of Congress dealing with priority issues such as a new budget, the farm bill, student loans, and immigration laws, before returning to their districts for the August recess.

Concerns with the PUPS bill, HR847 / S395 do not need to take a backseat to any other legislation.  Many of you have already written to your Congressman expressing your opposition, but please do so again.   It is especially important to write to Congressmen who were newly elected last year to let them know PUPS is not the welfare bill that HSUS/ASPCA portray.

HR847 now has 127 cosponsors with 11 added during the month of June; S395 has 21 cosponsors with one added this week.  HSUS has already sent out two email blasts this year urging their minions to send form letters to Congress from the HSUS website.

The HSUS synopsis is overly simplistic and misleading, stating PUPS closes a “loophole” that currently allows large, commercial breeders to sell puppies online or directly to the public and escape federal licensing and inspection requirements.

WHAT PUPS REALLY DOES
PUPS creates the new definition high volume retail breeder. A breeder only has to have interest or custody of one breeding female dog to fall under the first criteria test. The second criterion includes anyone who sells or offers for sale, via internet, phone, or newspaper more than 50 dogs in a year.  Co-ownerships and location of co-owners, age/sex/ownership of the sold dogs are not taken into consideration.  Rescue is not exempt.

PUPS reverses a long-standing, court tested basis for pet business licensing and regulation in the commercial sector.

PUPS fails to consider that sight unseen sales have always existed via magazines and printed media and are not a new phenomenon created by the Internet.

PUPS requires specific, excessive, and impractical space for physical exercise. It does not simply ensure that dogs have daily exercise as HSUS and supporters claim.

PUPS allows private, home/hobby breeders to be the subject of activist harassment and Freedom of Information Act requests.

Find more talking points to download for your letters to Congress at the SAOVA website: http://www.saova.org/PUPS.Campaign.html    Please do this now!  Flyers are also available to use next month when members of Congress are back at local offices.

The world not only belongs to those who show up, it's controlled by the best informed and most motivated.  Follow SAOVA on Facebook!

Cross posting is encouraged.

Susan Wolf
Sportsmen's & Animal Owners' Voting Alliance
Working to Identify and Elect Supportive Legislators
saova@earthlink.net


FEDERAL NEWS
AFBF FILES SUIT TO PROTECT FARMERS’ PRIVACY
National farming groups are suing the Obama administration over concerns that thousands of farmers and ranchers will have their personal information compromised. The American Farm Bureau Federation and the National Pork Producers Council filed a lawsuit on Friday to prevent the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) from responding to information requests from environmental groups that they worry could include personal details about farmers and their families. “We are sticking up for the tens of thousands of farmers and ranchers whose personal information would end up in the public domain,” Farm Bureau President Bob Stallman said in a statement. “This lawsuit is about the government’s unjustified intrusion into citizens’ private lives.” Source: The Hill blogs http://tinyurl.com/m352e3v  
Read press release at American Farm Bureau newsroom

GROUPS SUE USDA OVER MEAT LABELING RULE
Eight meat industry groups from the United States and Canada have sued the U.S. Department of Agriculture over the country-of-origin labeling rule finalized in May.  The American Meat Institute (AMI), American Association of Meat Processors, Canadian Cattlemen’s Association, Canadian Pork Council, National Cattlemen’s Beef Association, National Pork Producers Council, North American Meat Association and Southwest Meat Association joined in the lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court. The groups argue that the rule violates the Constitution by compelling speech without a substantial government interest; goes beyond the intentions of the original mandate; and is arbitrary and places undue burden on the industry. Read press release at AMI

HSUS FILES SUIT TO STOP HORSE SLAUGHTER
Following USDA's announcement late last week to issue an inspection permit to a New Mexico equine slaughter plant, animal rights organizations have filed suit against the agency and asked for an immediate injunction. HSUS and various organizations are suing under the National Environmental Protection Act, alleging the agency failed to conduct an environmental review before authorizing horse slaughterhouses to operate.  The plaintiffs are represented in the case by Schiff Hardin, LLP and attorneys within The HSUS' Animal Protection Litigation section.

Aside from the New Mexico plant, FSIS said it expects requests for inspection from two more plants in Iowa and Missouri in the future.

Earlier HSUS filed a petition with USDA’s Food Safety and Inspection Service and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to declare horsemeat unfit for human consumption. USDA denied that petition stating, “After carefully considering the issues raised in the petition and the supplemental statement, the Agency finds no merit in the assertion that all meat and meat food products from a horse without a proven lifetime history of all substances administered to it are adulterated under the FMIA.  FSIS has concluded that its existing authority under the FMIA and implementing regulations, which include requirements for the disposition of livestock suspected of having biological residues, along with the Agency’s National Residue Program (NRP), will allow the Agency to ensure that carcasses and horsemeat products that bear the mark of inspection are safe for human food.”  Full FSIS response http://tinyurl.com/k4ujk6d

RECREATIONAL FISHING AND HUNTING HERITAGE AND OPPORTUNITIES ACT
Introduced by Rep. Dan Benishek (R, MI-1) HR1825 directs Federal public land management officials to exercise their authority under existing law to facilitate use of and access to Federal public lands for fishing, sport hunting, and recreational shooting, and for other purposes. The bill establishes that Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and Forest Service lands are “open unless closed” to hunting, fishing and recreational shooting.  HR1825 does not create hunting, fishing or recreational shooting opportunities where they are not already authorized; however it protects congressionally authorized activities from legal challenges that seek to interfere with authorized hunting, fishing and recreational shooting on federal land.

This important legislation was approved by the House Natural Resources Committee with a 28-15 vote and reported to the House Agriculture Subcommittee on Conservation, Energy, and Forestry.

Saturday, June 29, 2013

Common Sense Prevails in East Coast Gestation Stall Decisions

Good news is always appreciated, and the common sense displayed by governmental officials in both New York and New Jersey this month is positive for pork producers. On Thursday, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie vetoed legislation that would have banned the use of sow stalls. The legislation had been pushed by animal rights groups. Earlier this month, the New York Legislature refused to pass legislation banning gestation stalls.

Gov. Christie said, “The proper balancing of humane treatment of gestating pigs  with the interests of farmers whose livelihood depends on their ability to properly manage their livestock best rests with the state’s farming experts — the State Board (of Agriculture) and the Department (of Agriculture).” In response, National Pork Producers Council (NPPC) President-elect Howard Hill, DVM, a pork producer from Cambridge, IA, said, “This is a great example of a governor standing up to powerful lobbying groups on behalf of small, independent farmers. America’s family farmers thank Gov. Christie for rejecting this bad legislation.”

NPPC also joined New York pork producers to applaud the New York Legislature for failing to pass a similar gestation stall-banning measure pushed by the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) and other animal rights groups. While talking about the situation, New York pork producer John Lash said, “This is about HSUS using New York to advance its national agenda, regardless of the negative impact it would have on the health and safety of the animals and the small, independent farmers who care for them. Decisions about animal well-being and housing should be determined by those who understand the animals and work with them every day.”  More ...

Related articles:
NPPC Applauds Veto of Proposed Sow Stall Ban in New Jersey
America's Hog Farmers Thank Connecticut Legislature for Supporting Local Farmers




Monday, June 10, 2013

USF&WS Proposes to Delist Gray Wolf Population Nationwide

Washington, DC – Today, June 7, 2013, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) formally announced its proposal to remove the gray wolf from the endangered species list throughout the lower 48 states (with the exception of the Mexican wolf population). The FWS’s monumental decision recognizes the gray wolf’s recovery resulting from state wildlife management and the participation of the hunting community.  This achievement in conservation demonstrates the impact of successful science based efforts across the country.

“Safari Club International would like to thank the U.S. FWS and Director Dan Ashe for proposing this science-based delisting for the gray wolf,” said SCI Preside Craig Kauffman. “SCI stands prepared to go to court to ensure that when this decision is finalized it will not be hijacked by environmentalists who prefer endless legal battles to science-based management.”

Safari Club International has long supported the delisting of the gray wolf species and the return of wolf management to the individual states.  States will manage their wolf populations in a proper balance with prey species and will also make certain that there is adequate wildlife available to hunters whose participation in wildlife management and conservation is essential to the conservation of both predator and prey species. More at link.

Wednesday, June 5, 2013

Legislation Briefs June 5, 2013


Dear SAOVA Friends,

The IRS scandal continues to unfold in Washington with Congressional hearings underway and now investigation by the FBI into IRS actions and targeting of certain nonprofits. Discovery that the Director of the IRS division implicated in using the improper targeting, Lois Lerner, is an active member of HSUS raised questions whether she used her position to run interference for HSUS.

Rep. Blaine Luetkemeyer (R-MO) wrote a letter to Lerner the year before asking that HSUS’s political spending be scrutinized. Lerner took no action. In response, Rep. Luetkemeyer wrote another letter to the Treasury Secretary and the Inspector General for Tax Administration renewing his call for an investigation of HSUS.

In his weekly column, Luetkemeyer writes, “Three years ago, a number of constituents brought to my attention their concerns that the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) was involved in political and lobbying activities that were in direct violation of its 501(c)3 tax-except status that prohibits such activities. To be clear, HSUS is not affiliated with your local animal shelter. In fact, only 1 percent of the money HSUS raises makes its way to animal shelters at all. Instead, it spends millions of dollars on lobbying, ballot initiatives, and other political activities.  For three years, and after providing the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) with more than 3,000 pages of documents exposing HSUS’ activities and calling for an investigation, the agency told me they could not discuss ongoing investigations and were also unable to confirm or deny whether or not an investigation was underway.”

Luetkemeyer continues, “This is the worst kind of government abuse that I have ever encountered in my more than two decades in public service and I am determined to get to the bottom of things on behalf of those folks who came to me three years ago with these allegations.”  http://luetkemeyer.house.gov

Please write to your own Congressman and ask why the IRS has ignored the repeated requests of Congressman Luetkemeyer to act upon the allegations that the HSUS was involved in political and lobbying activities that were in direct violation of its 501(c)3 tax-except status that prohibits such activities. A thorough investigation is needed to resolve this issue and to restore the faith and trust in our government.

The world not only belongs to those who show up, it's controlled by the best informed and most motivated.  Thanks for reading.

Cross posting is encouraged.

Susan Wolf
Sportsmen's & Animal Owners' Voting Alliance
Working to Identify and Elect Supportive Legislators
saova@earthlink.net

CENTER FOR ANIMAL LAW STUDIES (CALS)
CALS announced as part of its summer 2013 program a two credit course, Animal Law: Policy Influences through Legislation, Lobbying, Litigation taught by Nancy Perry, National Center for Animal Law Board Member.  Perry is also the VP of Government Affairs at HSUS. She oversees federal and state legislative campaigns, litigation, regulatory affairs, and grassroots activities. Previously, as the grassroots coordinator, she spearheaded state animal protection ballot initiatives and coordinated litigation strategies.   The class will be held at the ASPCA offices in Washington DC.   The course will survey the legislative and regulatory process for contemporary issues, and the role of lobbying and litigation as tactics to protect animals at the local, state, and national level. The course will address a wide variety of topics: legislative drafting; lobbying strategies; federal, state and local legislative approaches; application and enforcement of federal statutes such as the Animal Welfare Act, the Humane Slaughter Act, the Horse Protection Act, the Endangered Species Act, the Marine Mammal Protection Act, the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, and the Wild Horses and Burros Act;  state laws and citizen initiatives concerning anti-cruelty, hunting, trapping, animal fighting, performing animals, and farm animals; consumer protection actions. The goal of this course is to expose students to the daily forums, procedures and unique challenges for animal law practitioners in the nation’s capital, to reinforce critical concepts for informed advocacy and give students hands on experience to prepare them to engage in the political, legislative and litigation work for animals.

2012 HUMANE LEGISLATOR OF THE YEAR
May, 2013.  Former US Senator Scott Brown (R-MA) took top honors from HSUS/HSLF as the 2012 Humane Legislator of the Year.  Brown was honored for:

  • Co-leading efforts to remove a polar bear trophy import provision from the Sportsmen's Act of 2012 which would have allowed importation of polar bear trophies taken in Canadian sport hunts before the polar bear was listed on the Endangered Species Act;
  • Original cosponsorship of the Egg Products Inspection Act to set federal government regulated standards for housing and raising egg-laying hens;
  • Cosponsorship of the American Horse Slaughter Prevention Act to ban the slaughter of horses for human consumption;
  • Cosponsoring the PUPS Act, S. 707, to license and federally regulate retail sellers of dogs;
  • And for sending a letter to USDA urging the agency to expedite its Proposed Retail Pet Sellers Rule.

In February Fox News Channel hired Brown as a contributor, stating that Brown’s dedication to out-of-the box thinking on key issues made him an important voice in the country.

2014 BALLOT MEASURES
Arkansas Ballot Measure Signature Requirements Amendment would require ballot issue groups to collect at least 75% of the valid signatures required in order to receive additional time to gather extra signatures once the petition has been turned in to the Secretary of State.

Michigan Wolf Hunting Referendum would overturn Public Act 520, a law that allows the state to establish wolf hunting seasons in the Upper Peninsula.  On May 8 Governor Rick Snyder signed into law SB 288 which gives the Natural Resource Commission the authority to declare game animals and establish seasons without the need for action by the legislature. The law essentially renders the 2014 ballot referendum meaningless.

Missouri Right-to-Farm Amendment would add a section to the state constitution that explicitly guarantees farmers and ranchers the right to engage in their livelihoods and produce food for others.

OHIO EXOTIC ANIMAL OWNERS APPEAL
COLUMBUS, Ohio (AP) — Some owners of exotic animals say a new Ohio law is onerous and infringes on their constitutional rights, and they've asked a federal appeals court to strike it down. Under the new law, owners who want to keep their animals must obtain new state-issued permits by Jan. 1, 2014. They must pass background checks, pay fees, obtain liability insurance or surety bonds and show inspectors they can properly contain the animals and care for them. The law exempts sanctuaries, research institutions and facilities accredited by the two national zoo groups. Attorney Robert Owens says in the brief filed with the 6th U.S. District Court of Appeals in Cincinnati that the only way for his clients to qualify for an exemption under the law is for them to join either the Association of Zoos and Aquariums or the Zoological Association of America — groups he says are at odds with his clients.

JASON SMITH WINS MISSOURI SPECIAL ELECTION
State Rep. Jason Smith (R) easily won Missouri’s heavily conservative 8th district special election yesterday.  Smith, the state House speaker pro tem replaces Jo Ann Emerson who resigned earlier this year to work in the private sector.  Smith, age 32, will become one of the youngest members of Congress.  In 2009 Smith received a Legislative Leader Award from SAOVA.

Friday, May 3, 2013

USDA/APHIS Rule Impacting Small/Hobby Breeders Advances For Executive Review


Federal Informational Update:

(Friday, May 03, 2013)
The AKC has learned that United States Department of Agriculture (USDA)/Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) has completed a full review of all public comments on proposed changes to federal Animal Welfare Act (AWA) regulations affecting “Retail Pet Stores and Licensing Exemptions”. A final version of the rule has now advanced to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for further review and possible changes ahead of publication as a final rule by USDA. Typically, it takes 30-90 days for the OMB to review a final rule before it is returned to the USDA. Once a rule is published, there is generally a period of months before any changes to existing law are implemented.

No information about the contents of the final rule is available at this time. The AKC continues to express strong concerns to members of Congress and the USDA about the May 2012 proposed rule change. AKC will continue to provide updated information on the status of this rule and possible action to be taken as additional information becomes available.

Background
The AKC remains extremely concerned about the May 2012 proposed change to AWA regulations that would require all who own more than four “breeding females” and sell even one animal “sight unseen” to be regulated as a commercial breeder and subject to federal commercial breeder licensing, regulation and inspections requirements. The term “breeding female” is not defined in this rule, so it is unclear how USDA or even breeders themselves would determine who falls under these regulations. The term also includes multiple species (including cats, dogs, and other small mammals).

The AKC believes that the USDA’s “one size fits all” regulations are not in the best interest of all dogs, responsible breeders, or puppy buyers. It is unreasonable and virtually impossible for many small hobby breeders to comply with the strict kennel engineering standards that were designed for large commercial operations.

For more information on this proposal, including AKC’s formal comments on the proposed rule, links to the AKC petition in opposition to the rule, fact sheets and frequently asked questions, visit AKC’s USDA/APHIS Regulations Resource Page.

Next Steps
The public comment period regarding the proposed rule closed in August 2012. Once again, AKC thanks the over 70,000 individuals who signed AKC’s petition in support of small hobby breeders, and the many individuals, clubs and organizations who also commented on the many problems with the proposed rule. No information about the contents of the final rule is available at this time. However, AKC will continue to provide updated information and possible action to be taken when additional information on the contents of the final rule becomes available.

This message is a service of the American Kennel Club's Government Relations Department and you are receiving it in response to your request.  This information may be reprinted or forwarded appropriately with a citation to AKC.   Our website address is:  http://www.akc.org