Friday, September 24, 2010

Even With Sympathetic Host, Puppy Mill Supporters Look Ridiculous

Mark Reardon, usually an advocate of less government regulation and someone who has no love for the Humane Society of the U.S., had on guests from both sides to discuss Propsotion B, a ballot initiative to prevent Puppy Mill Cruelty. First up was Barb Schmitz, who spoke about the facts about puppy mills in Missouri (the "puppy mill capital of the U.S.") and explained why compassionate people should vote yes on Prop B:

While Schmitz spoke about the current horrible conditions of puppy mills, the oppositions is basically spending all their time focusing on conspiracy theories about the Humane Society of the United States (which Reardon, unfortunately, is susceptible to). It's pretty amazing to hear how Mindy Patterson, the leader of the Prop B opposition, does not even seem to have basic facts or statistics about puppy mills in Missouri. One can only imagine how badly she would have performed if Reardon had pushed her a little harder:

Reardon did point out an interesting contradiction in Patterson's testimony. On the one hand, she's claiming there are already strong welfare laws on the books. But on the other hand, she's claiming that the extremely minimal regulations suggested by Prop B will put all of the breeders out of business. But if the breeders are already treating the dogs well, why would such minimal restrictions cause them such distress? Just a reminder, here are the conditions proposed in Proposition B. If the law passes, breeders will be required to provide dogs with:
Sufficient food and clean water;
Necessary veterinary care;
Sufficient housing, including protection from the elements;
Sufficient space to turn and stretch freely, lie down, and fully extend his or her limbs;
Regular exercise; and
Adequate rest between breeding cycles
If providing these basic necessities puts some breeders out of business, then they shouldn't have been in business in the first place. The breeders who take good care of their animals will have no trouble complying with the new law.

Vote YES on Prop B.


  1. There was a similar piece of legislation proposed while I lived in NC. I remember a newscast, which has an interview with an opponent of the bill. She likened telling someone how many dogs they can have with telling someone how many couches they can have. And that, in itself, describes how such people view animals.

    Thanks for posting this.

    PS. We do NOT need to eat cattle. Mr. Rearden is incorrect there. And, coming from an animal rights activist, I assure you that the Humane Society of the U.S. is NOT an animal rights organization.

  2. Totally agree! thanks for posting!