The intent was 1) to ban out of state importation of puppy mill dogs; and 2) to discourage instate puppy mills by serving notice to the breders that they will not profit from the practice.

I would have liked the bill to have been even stronger but it would not have passed. Hence, it was a bill that improved the situation. I will keep working to address other areas, though [with] legislatures, nothing is either easy, or guaranteed.

I just saw your [response] because I don’t check this blog often ( it came to me through a Google alert). If you send me an email I willbe able to respond quickly to questions and concerns.

Best,

Fred

Rather, my comment has to do with a dog of questionable health. Seems that once the dog’s forehead is stamped as “sick,” he/she is merely tossed aside. I buy a box of cereal, I open it and it is stale. I return it to the store, get my refund and they toss the box of cereal into the trash. Someone buys a puppy. After a few weeks or a couple months, the puppy becomes ill — perhaps it was bought with a pre-existing condition or perhaps it developed the condition while in it’s new home. It’s returned. Pure and simple.

But what becomes of the returned puppy? Because they are a commodity, their life is practically meaningless in the scheme of business. As such, they are disposable. That concerns me.

The last time I had a dog of a specific breed was as a small child. For forty-some years I have only had the “accidents” and the “rescues” from other people’s irresponsibilities. Many people ride past a dog on the side of the road and say, “I hate when people dump a dog like that.” I am the person who stops. I respect that they have life, too.

Your bill seems to have missed that critical point to my thinking. We are just in different places looking at this from different points of view.

I hope this clarifies my intent.

Your post was forwarded to me by someone who had the same reaction I had: Why would someone attack legislation that discourages the importation of dogs from out of state puppy mills? I am quite surprised by your view of this as we took great pains to solicit opinions from many people.

As for me, to answer your question: I have had dogs since I was a little boy as well as goats,ducks, chickens, etc….I also worked for five years to establish a dog park in my hometown amidst some strong opposition by neighborhood activists. The park has been a success, proving what we advocated all along.

Hence, your remarks that I am somehow not caring for animals is shocking. You really should do your research before making such statements.

As for the specifics of what you oppose, the bill does specify what being “sick” is. That is, specifically, congenital defects. Again, it is to combat something I have seen firsthand when I rescued German Shepherds that were from puppy mills.

Lastly, the car analogyis something I heard someone say during this process. In retrospect, I see your point. Cars are replaceable, our best friends are not. Hence, I concede that point, but still contend the bill is a good one. I will be working on more aninal friendly legislation in the future and welcome your views. You have my website address. My personal email address is acamillo@gmail,com , for anyone wanting to send me a thought about any issue.

Best,

Fred Camillo