# Puppy Breeders selling online



## Eric Johnson (Dec 23, 2004)

*You were warned. USDA/APHIS adopts rule on home breeding of dogs.*

More info as it is available.

I haven't any effective date yet.

----- Forwarded Message -----

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/usda-cracks-internet-pet-sales-20207528

USDA Cracks Down on Internet Pet Sales

WASHINGTON September 10, 2013 (AP)
By MARY CLARE JALONICK Associated Press

The Agriculture Department is cracking down on dog breeders who sell puppies over the Internet with new regulations that will force them to apply for federal licenses.

The rules announced Tuesday would subject dog owners who breed more than four females and sell the puppies online, by mail or over the phone to the same oversight faced by wholesale animal breeders.

Many breeders who run their businesses online have skirted federal oversight by classifying themselves as retail pet stores, which are exempt from licensing requirements. Commercial pet stores aren't required to have licenses because buyers can see the animals before they buy them and decide whether they appear healthy and cared for. But that's not the case when buying over the Internet.

The idea behind the new rules, says USDA's Kevin Shea, is that either government inspectors or buyers see the animals with their own eyes before they are sold.

Shea, administrator of the USDA's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, says the agency is responding to a 2010 USDA inspector general's report that uncovered grisly conditions at so-called "puppy mills" around the country. The report recommended that the department tighten the animal welfare laws — written more than four decades ago, long before the advent of the Internet — to cut down on unscrupulous breeders.

In addition to finding dirty, bug-infested conditions at many breeding facilities, inspectors cited numerous reports of buyers who received animals who were sick or dying.

The new rules, first proposed last year, would ensure that most people who sell pets over the Internet, by phone or mail order can no longer do so sight-unseen. Sellers either must open their doors to the public so buyers can see the animals before they purchase them, or obtain a license and be subject to inspections by the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.

The rules are targeted to dog breeders but could affect breeders of other animals too. The Agriculture Department estimates that up to 4,640 dog breeders could be affected by the rule, along with about 325 cat breeders and up to 75 rabbit breeders.

Small-size breeders have lobbied against the changes, saying the rules could regulate them out of business. USDA's Shea says the department set the minimum of four breeding females to ensure that those smaller sellers would be able to continue offering puppies.

"People who have generally been thought of as 'hobby breeders' continue to be exempt," Shea said.

Shea said the licenses will cost $750 or less and complying with the USDA regulations should only be expensive for breeders who aren't already ensuring their animals have adequate housing and medical care.

———

Find Mary Clare Jalonick on Twitter at http://twitter.com/mcjalonick


----------



## jacduck (Aug 17, 2011)

How is this going to affect what we love and do?

http://news.yahoo.com/usda-cracks-down-internet-pet-sales-040225530.html


----------



## afdahl (Jul 5, 2004)

Wow. I submitted comments when they were invited; guess they didn't take MY advice!

This is going to hurt some of our top people, breeders who really know the breed and control a lot of bitches through networking. I can only hope that the licensing requirements don't match those of current USDA wholesale breeders, requiring separate kennel buildings with strict engineering standards that would be impossible for most people because of zoning laws.

They say it won't be difficult or expensive to comply; we'll see.

Amy Dahl


----------



## yellow machine (Dec 7, 2005)

This will keep the mass producing breeders in check. I guess the good breeders will have to choose their breeding wisely.


----------



## frontier (Nov 3, 2003)

afdahl said:


> Wow. I submitted comments when they were invited; guess they didn't take MY advice!
> 
> This is going to hurt some of our top people, breeders who really know the breed and control a lot of bitches through networking. I can only hope that the licensing requirements don't match those of current USDA wholesale breeders, requiring separate kennel buildings with strict engineering standards that would be impossible for most people because of zoning laws.
> 
> ...


The federal government did not listen to over 70,000 other concerned individuals who wrote and signed AKC petitions. Over Four breeding females puts you under this regulation. The initial language was ambiguous on what age is a breeding female. I routinely keep one to two pups annually until two years old until all health clearances can be done and I can evaluate whether the females meet my high standards for future breeding. I could be impacted simply by the age of my younger girls by definition or simply by shipping one pup or even by allowing one pup to be transported via ground transport service. And I only breed 1-2 litters annually.


----------



## afdahl (Jul 5, 2004)

frontier said:


> Over Four breeding females puts you under this regulation. The initial language was ambiguous on what age is a breeding female. I routinely keep one to two pups annually until two years old until all health clearances can be done and I can evaluate whether the females are of the quality for breeding. I could easily fall into the category simply by the age of my younger girls by definition or simply by shipping one pup or even by allowing one pup to be transported via ground transport service.


I said that in one of my comments: that good breeding is SELECTIVE breeding, which by definition means having several brood-bitch candidates around from which you select the best. If they consider those candidates "breeding females," I guess I'll have to insist all puppy buyers show up in person. 

Amy Dahl


----------



## Bridget Bodine (Mar 4, 2008)

TODAY 12:45 PM eastern Conference call , sign up is easy


From: Klingel, Meghan K - APHIS
Sent: Monday, September 09, 2013 3:29 PM
Subject: APHIS Animal Welfare Act Regulatory Update Call

Good afternoon:

Please join APHIS’ Administrator Kevin Shea on a conference call tomorrow, September 10, at 12:45 p.m. EDT for an important Animal Welfare Act regulatory update.

In order to participate on tomorrow’s call, you will need to register in advance. Please click on the link below to provide your name, organization, and email address. Once you’ve submitted your information, you will promptly receive an email that includes the call-in number and a unique conference code to enter the call. This will allow you to immediately join the call rather than waiting for an operator to connect you.

If you would like to make other colleagues aware of the call, please forward them the link below. To avoid any problems connecting to the call, do not share your unique code. The registration link is active now, and I encourage you to register in advance of the call.

https://customer.accuconference.com/Registration/index.aspx?pkRegQG=1dac17d9-9df5-47e7-871f-2513965c6391

Thank you,
Meghan K. Klingel

Meghan K. Klingel
Acting Advisor for State and Stakeholder Relations
Legislative and Public Affairs
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
U.S. Department of Agriculture


----------



## swamprat II (Feb 22, 2004)

We all know how well the Federal government works! It will either be too much or not enough. And common sense is certainly out of the question.


----------



## bjoiner (Feb 25, 2008)

The article says, "Sellers either must allow buyers to see animals in person before they purchase them or obtain a license and be subject to inspections by the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service."

Does this mean they are just allowed or must come see the animals in person? I have not read the regulations.


----------



## afdahl (Jul 5, 2004)

Bridget, thanks so much for that link!

I just listened to the call. They said a few things that seem like they might be good.

Breeders/sellers of "working dogs" are exempt
They expect most breeders to need no structural or operational changes (I don't understand how given that this is a *definition* change, so I would think the existing rules for wholesalers would apply, but that's what they said).
Buyers do not have to come to breeder's premises to be exempt, but seller, buyer, and animal must all be in the same place at the same time.

They said will post press release after the call--I couldn't access the site but imagine traffic will slow eventually. Link is http://www.aphis.usda.gov .

Amy Dahl


----------



## Hunt'EmUp (Sep 30, 2010)

Is selling on the internet the same as advertising on the internet? Just wondering there are a lot of sites that advertise litters, also many people advertise litters, but do not sell over the internet, buyer might sign up on a list for pick on an upcoming breeding, but the majority of pups are not sent out without buyers coming out to see the litter and pick their pups, and without seller meeting-approving the buyers . This seems to go under the radar of this rule, which appears to be protection for people who are charged and sent pups without ever seeing them, the condition they were raised in, or picking their pup. I don't see how many working dog breeders would fall under this rule, as there's so much buyer-seller interaction with working dog breeding. I've flown in to choose a pup, sure distance might prevent many from doing so, but I've never had a seller say NO you cannot come out; might be a red-flag if they did. Heck when I had a litter, I wanted the buyers to come out, buyers have too make it pass the inquisition after all.


----------



## firehouselabs (Jan 23, 2008)

yellow machine said:


> This will keep the mass producing breeders in check. I guess the good breeders will have to choose their breeding wisely.


And raise their prices, and place their fewer pups with only the "choicest" homes, which would now make it that much harder for the average hunting home to be able to afford a well bred pup.


----------



## Bridget Bodine (Mar 4, 2008)

I am listening to the Q&A now .
4 bitches who are physically able to be bred and become pregnant is the definition of breeding bitch 

IF ALL buyers come to see the puppy in person before purchasing you would be exempt. The buyer does not need to come to your home , but the seller and the dog and the buyer all need to be present for the sale. If YOU SHIP any pups (even one)you will need to comply. 
They will be answering ads and asking if you will ship to find non compliance

There will be a phone # to call to see if you are compliant. Susan Patterson , a lab breeder who shows, hunt tests and hunts with her dogs asked if her kennel was included and they could not give her an answer on her dual purpose dogs. They said she would need to call. 
If you are selling for research, testing, experimentation , exhibition and pets you need to comply , if you sell for hunting, working you do not need to comply.
I am trying to keep up here , so this is not verbatim

If your intent is to sell as a working dog , stock dog or hunting dog and the buyer does not follow through you will not be held liable 

end of call


----------



## frontier (Nov 3, 2003)

Hunt'EmUp said:


> Is selling on the internet the same as advertising on the internet? Just wondering there are a lot of sites that advertise litters, also many people advertise litters, but do not sell over the internet, buyer might sign up on a list for pick on an upcoming breeding, but the majority of pups are not sent out without buyers coming out to see the litter and pick their pups, and without seller meeting-approving the buyers . This seems to go under the radar of this rule, which appears to be protection for people who are charged and sent pups without ever seeing them, the condition they were raised in, or picking their pup. I don't see how many working dog breeders would fall under this rule, as there's so much buyer-seller interaction with working dog breeding. I've flown in to choose a pup, sure distance might prevent many from doing so, but I've never had a seller say NO you cannot come out; might be a red-flag if they did. Heck when I had a litter, I wanted the buyers to come out, got to check-up on them after all.


What do you base your assumption on that the "majority of pups are not sent out without buyers coming to see the litter"? Just because you may choose to fly or drive to pick out your own puppy, does not mean the majority of buyers choose that option. I've been breeding performance Labradors for almost 30 years, and it's about 50-50 on those clients that live close enough to drive, or opt for the dog to go via airlines or ground transport. I've also been purchasing pups for the same amount of years from reputable breeders, and can count on one hand the times I've driven to pick up my pup versus allowing the breeder who has observed the pups for 8 weeks to make that selection for me.


----------



## Eric Johnson (Dec 23, 2004)

There was a conference call today led by APHIS to explain the new rule. There were more questions raised than answers
given.

For example, They stumbled and bumbled about the question of dogs that are used
for hunting and for show. An exhibition dog is covered under the rule whereas a
hunting dog is not. (Aside from the 4 breedable bitches standpoint.) Further,
dogs sold as pets are covered but the breeder of retrievers can sell all dogs as
hunting dogs and not be covered....whether the dog goes hunting or not. We will
see the rise of the hunting chihuahua under this definition.

I believe that if I sell 1 dog overseas without a buyer visit, I will be out of
compliance. While we are working to expand diversity in our small gene pool, per
APHIS we can't do it without becoming Class B dealers.

Rescues are not covered because they meet the buyer ... though in many breed
rescues, the buyer and the foster home may be a continent apart.

Way under estimated the cost of compliance. If I have 4 breeding females and they
live in the house with me, it's going to cost about $35-50,000 to set up a
kennel operation other than just four wire cages. This aside from the issue that
the puppies won't be socialized with the family.

You won't have to meet a buyer at your home. Instead, you can meet at a WalMart
parking lot to sell your dog. Wonder how long that will stand.

I got the distinct impression that the greater share of the 200,000 + comments were either
not read or these guys are just "Invincibly Ignorant."

Rule is to be effective 60 days after publication which may be even tonight.

Eric


----------



## Eric Johnson (Dec 23, 2004)

I've posted the notes I made during the conference call in another thread. Mayhaps Chris can move it.


----------



## Hunt'EmUp (Sep 30, 2010)

frontier said:


> What do you base your assumption on that the "majority of pups are not sent out without buyers coming to see the litter"?


 What I can base such on? Well the most unbiased, un-skewed, and absolutely most correct evidence that one can base any assumption on, My Personal Experience, of course , Almost all the litters I've been associated with (mine, training buds, Pro-trainers, etc) Buyers usually come to pick up pups, or meet the breeder @ a function (hunt-test etc.) to pick pups up. Most pup are sold locally, or into the community where the dogs-breeder are runs. It has always seemed that many buyer&sellers do not like the idea of shipping, and will make the trip. A few have flown in to take pups home, under the seat. Of 20+ litters over the years, I know of one pup that was air-shipped without the buyer-breeder interacting face to face, it didn't sit well with the breeder. Maybe this is not the case with high impact breeders, just the case with everyone I know of that breeds. 

But then we're talking my personal experience vs. yours... SO of course I'm right LOL


----------



## Bridget Bodine (Mar 4, 2008)

TODAYS post on the USDA page http://www.aphis.usda.gov/newsroom/2013/09/retail_pet_final_rule.shtml


----------



## Dave Farrar (Mar 16, 2012)

Hunt'EmUp said:


> Of 20+ litters over the years, I know of one pup that was air-shipped without the buyer-breeder interacting face to face, it didn't sit well with the breeder.
> 
> But then we're talking my personal experience vs. yours... SO of course I'm right LOL


I had my pup flown to me without a face to face meeting with the breeder. We spoke on the phone 15+ times and he was paid for before the breeding ever took place. She picked the pup for me based on what I told her I was looking for. We still email back and forth over a year later. I'm pretty sure she is happy with where her pup ended up.


----------



## Swampcollie (Jan 16, 2003)

yellow machine said:


> This will keep the mass producing breeders in check. I guess the good breeders will have to choose their breeding wisely.


No, it's going to do exactly the opposite.

The large scale commercial breeding operation will not be affected by this revision at all. This benefits them by eliminating a good share of their competition. They can charge even more for substandard dogs because the suppy will be smaller. 

The real loser is the consumer who is going to be priced out of range of owning a purebred dog.


----------



## firehouselabs (Jan 23, 2008)

For those with 3 and under females - you better not have an unspayed female barn cat. The rules say breeding females with that lovely "and/or" statement which would mean that it is the aggregate of females on the property. 
Example:
You have 3 female dogs. One of which had pups 5 months ago and you have one of those pesky "leftovers" that everyone wants to have. One of the other females is bred already and the last one should be coming into heat soon, for the last time before she retires and you have a well thought out plan for an awesome litter. Someone calls from clear across the country saying that they would love to have that older pup since it is already housebroke and you have been working with it daily on its obedience. Since its a 15 hour trip one way and the buyer can't get the time off, he wants you to ship said pup using Katie Beckers awesome business "Move the Dog Transport". The money is wired, the trip is scheduled, and your daughter comes into the house with a tiny kitten- one of a litter of six that your barn cat had two weeks ago and hid in the loft. 
Now what? Legally you have 4 breeding "FEMALES" (and that isn't even including your wife ) on site and you are selling a pup sight unseen other than via photos or videos over the internet. I suppose you could disavow owning the cat, but you had better hope that your darling daughter is no where around, or said cat either, when the inspectors come by. I think that if you had some a$$hat dem- I mean bureaucrat for an inspector, you would have a very hard time explaining yourself even if were a stray/feral or neighbors cat! 
Instead of cat, insert Gerbil, fish?, rabbit, pet mice, etc... They included domesticated farm animals...does this mean chickens? So if you have a flock of chickens or a pair of ornamental ducks, would this too put you over the limit? How many here have more than one breed? I have 3 labs and a cocker. All females. I have both bought and shipped pups and adults via ground and air without the buyer seeing them a head of time. I had the breeder choose my pups for me based on the criteria I gave, and I got what I asked for. 
Granted, for now anyway, since I have "working" dogs I am exempt, how long before the wording gets "tweaked" again to change that part of the deal? All these folks need is that foot in the door, and they aren't using battering rams to get it. They play on peoples emotions and sense to do whats right and exploit it and twist it to fit their needs. Heck, look at our government as a whole. No one notices a little change here, a little change there, until we are left standing there with shell shocked looks on our faces and wondering how we got to this point.


----------



## Eric Johnson (Dec 23, 2004)

Terry-

That was the proposed rule. There have been several changes in the past year. See:

FAQ: http://www.aphis.usda.gov/newsroom/2013/09/pdf/faq_retail_pets_final_rule.pdf

Final Rule: http://www.aphis.usda.gov/newsroom/2013/09/pdf/pet_retail_docket_2011-2003.pdf


----------



## Eric Johnson (Dec 23, 2004)

Raina-

It could be even worse. That long distance phone call wanting to buy the spare pup could very well be the USDA checking on your sales methods. They said today that blind phone calls to breeders would be one method used to find people who should be licensed and are not.

About a year ago there was a notice published in the procurement announcements that the USDA was in the market for data mining software. The notice was withdrawn about the time they realized that it was going top take a year to get the new rule out. At one point today I swear I heard the USDA folks let slip that they were going to datamine for potential license violations too.


----------



## frontier (Nov 3, 2003)

firehouselabs said:


> For those with 3 and under females - you better not have an unspayed female barn cat. The rules say breeding females with that lovely "and/or" statement which would mean that it is the aggregate of females on the property.
> Example:
> You have 3 female dogs. One of which had pups 5 months ago and you have one of those pesky "leftovers" that everyone wants to have. One of the other females is bred already and the last one should be coming into heat soon, for the last time before she retires and you have a well thought out plan for an awesome litter. Someone calls from clear across the country saying that they would love to have that older pup since it is already housebroke and you have been working with it daily on its obedience. Since its a 15 hour trip one way and the buyer can't get the time off, he wants you to ship said pup using Katie Beckers awesome business "Move the Dog Transport". The money is wired, the trip is scheduled, and your daughter comes into the house with a tiny kitten- one of a litter of six that your barn cat had two weeks ago and hid in the loft.
> Now what? Legally you have 4 breeding "FEMALES" (and that isn't even including your wife ) on site and you are selling a pup sight unseen other than via photos or videos over the internet. I suppose you could disavow owning the cat, but you had better hope that your darling daughter is no where around, or said cat either, when the inspectors come by. I think that if you had some a$$hat dem- I mean bureaucrat for an inspector, you would have a very hard time explaining yourself even if were a stray/feral or neighbors cat!
> ...


And there you have it.. HSUS/PETA agenda all along.. use whatever means possible to brainwash the public into grouping breeders into the same classification. HSUS/PETA lobby convinced the federal government to do their dirty work for them. And their campaign still continues against licensed USDA breeders.


----------



## windycanyon (Dec 21, 2007)

So let me get this straight. As long as you do not ship puppies (premises unseen), the number of breeding females doesn't matter other than what your local ordinances call for. 
And as long as a buyer comes in person to your "store" (lol), you are a retailer, and will be exempt from this license.
Correct?


----------



## Nicole (Jul 8, 2007)

windycanyon said:


> So let me get this straight. As long as you do not ship puppies (premises unseen), the number of breeding females doesn't matter other than what your local ordinances call for.
> And as long as a buyer comes in person to your "store" (lol), you are a retailer, and will be exempt from this license.
> Correct?


That's my understanding. And if that's the case, I don't see a problem outside of getting a foot in the door.


----------



## roseberry (Jun 22, 2010)

i think it's time to organize the "million bitch march" and cover d.c. in doggie poo!


----------



## frontier (Nov 3, 2003)

windycanyon said:


> So let me get this straight. As long as you do not ship puppies (premises unseen), the number of breeding females doesn't matter other than what your local ordinances call for.
> And as long as a buyer comes in person to your "store" (lol), you are a retailer, and will be exempt from this license.
> Correct?



So according to the FAQ: 
*Under the final rule, what constitutes a breeding female?A.​*Only female animals with the capacity to breed are considered “breeding females.” Females that an APHIS inspector decides cannot breed due to age, infirmity,illness, or other issues are not considered “breeding females.”

Leaves a significant amount of power with an APHIS inspector to make a determination whether a dog is considered a "breeding female" which is a big concern for me. 

And what takes precidence regarding number of intact females? State breeder regulations or federal? Does federal licensing now make one subject to state commerical breeder licensing even though the number of intact females are different?


http://www.aphis.usda.gov/newsroom/2013/09/pdf/faq_retail_pets_final_rule.pdf

​


----------



## Happy Gilmore (Feb 29, 2008)

Wonder about selling dogs to Taiwan?????


----------



## Bridget Bodine (Mar 4, 2008)

Todays conference call recording http://vimeo.com/74234294?utm_sourc...5ODBkMzc4MGRkOTIyfDYzMTAyMzB8MTM3ODg0NDA2Mw==


----------



## Dogtrainer4God (Oct 10, 2006)

This is all very worry some for sure, but since we are all selling "working dogs," it would seem that we are exempt - correct?


----------



## mwk56 (May 12, 2009)

That's my take--and the exemption that allows us to sell an occasional "pet" that doesn't measure up as a working dog should cover most of us.

Meredith


----------



## Bridget Bodine (Mar 4, 2008)

http://www.aphis.usda.gov/newsroom/2013/09/pdf/pet_retail_docket_2011-2003.pdf

READ THIS for the verbage on hunting dogs


----------



## frontier (Nov 3, 2003)

here's the AKC's latest legislative alert
http://www.akc.org/press_center/article.cfm?article_id=5117


----------



## Dogtrainer4God (Oct 10, 2006)

> However, this rule will only affect those dog breeders who sell dogs as pets, not for
> hunting, security, breeding, or other purposes;


 This is the quote from the article, glad to be in the hunting dog department


----------



## windycanyon (Dec 21, 2007)

And I'll be glad to be down to 4 breedable girls before long, regardless.


----------



## firehouselabs (Jan 23, 2008)

Ok, around page 30 on this link:http://www.aphis.usda.gov/newsroom/2..._2011-2003.pdf someone asks about requiring the direct viewing of the breeding animals and their living conditions. APHIS states that they are NOT changing the wording to include this (Thank God!) because it is beyond the scope of what they are trying to accomplish? WTH? I thought that the whole reason they are doing this is to insure the health and well being of the animals, right? I guess this only pertains to _some_ animals and not others? They go on and on about the poor puppies being bought sight unseen with so many health issues, so they try to correct it by making people come and see the pup before its shipped. It doesn't require the seller to show anyone the dam or kennel area. It was even brought up that someone could meet at a dummy store or heck, even Walmart and that would fulfill the requirement. 
Don't get me wrong, I am all against this stupid farce against breeders, but how does this ensure that the pup that you are buying is healthy? Give a pup a bath with sweet smelling shampoo, clean the goop out of its eyes, feed it some tylan powder to cover up the diarrhea, and you have a pup that looks pretty normal. How many pet people even have an inkling of a clue as to what to look for? They are impulse buyers! See that cute little puppy? Oh I gotta have it now! Oh, it got a bit car sick, and that trip really tired him out because he just lays around, which is great because he isn't chewing on anything. Oh, and he must be housebroken because he hasn't pooped once! 
Unless the puppy mill or back yard breeder is a total idiot and tries to sell a half starved flea bitten hairless mutt (in which case, the buyer will most likely buy it to 'save it' ), I really don't see the whole point of this buyer, seller, pet, in the same place rule. 
I guess I am kind of hard hearted, but if you spend more time picking out a set of tires for the car or do more research as to the number of transfat calories in your lunch, then I think that you get what you deserve. What happened to survival of the fittest? Heck, what happened to darwinism?


----------



## hotel4dogs (Aug 2, 2010)

Yes, but you are now liable for sales tax since the buyer purchased the dog in state. 
IL is trying to crack down on breeders not charging sales tax for puppies. I got a nasty letter from them warning me that I'd better start charging and submitting sales tax for all puppies I sell.
I don't sell puppies. I board dogs.




windycanyon said:


> So let me get this straight. As long as you do not ship puppies (premises unseen), the number of breeding females doesn't matter other than what your local ordinances call for.
> And as long as a buyer comes in person to your "store" (lol), you are a retailer, and will be exempt from this license.
> Correct?


----------



## Sue Kiefer (Mar 4, 2006)

You don't charge sales tax on boarding?
In my county in Wis. it is 5.5%.
Same for selling anything.
Sue


----------



## mwk56 (May 12, 2009)

I have a sales tax license and have to collect on pups picked up here. Iowa does not require sales tax on boarding because it is a "service," not a "product."

Meredith


----------



## Norse2 (Oct 10, 2007)

Can we still take deposits on puppies without the buyer seeing the pup or before the breeding takes place?


----------



## hotel4dogs (Aug 2, 2010)

Luckily, IL doesn't have a tax on services *yet*. I think it's because they haven't figured out how to exempt doctors and lawyers from having to charge the service tax.
So no, no sales tax on boarding.




Sue Kiefer said:


> You don't charge sales tax on boarding?
> In my county in Wis. it is 5.5%.
> Same for selling anything.
> Sue


----------



## Eric Johnson (Dec 23, 2004)

Norse2 said:


> Can we still take deposits on puppies without the buyer seeing the pup or before the breeding takes place?


I would guess so ... so long as the deposit is refundable. Until the sale is completed,you would not be in violation. Once the sale is complete, you could be in violation and refusing to refund the deposit could cause you to cross the line. However, I'll take this to a lawyer that is read in on the USDA/APHIS rule.


----------



## Eric Johnson (Dec 23, 2004)

To show the interest this rule is generating, I asked your question and already have the answer. Here's the exchange....

*******
"Can we still take deposits on puppies without the buyer seeing the pup or before the breeding takes place?"

My thoughts are that so long as the deposit is refundable, no sale has taken place and since the sale is not complete, no rule has yet taken effect. Correct?

Eric
******
The answer from my friend the lawyer...

Obviously, it is impossible for a dog to be present before it is born. The sale takes place when the buyer takes possession of the dog. So, yes, you are correct.
*******


----------



## bburress (Aug 3, 2008)

With these types of legislation, it seems the devil is always in the details. How will enforcement officials interpret the language? My brother-in-law is having trouble with some neighbors b/c they call animal services on him all the time. He takes care of his dog, but it does spend most of its time in the backyard. The neighbor waits until a rainy day, then calls to report an animal standing in mud with muddy water. Of course he's in mud with muddy water, it's raining! When it stops raining, they change the water.
The enforcement official who comes each time has been a pain in the ***. So, I see the same with this law, it will all come down to enforcement and interpretation.


----------



## Eric Johnson (Dec 23, 2004)

This was written by Barb Reichman, the Legislative Liaison of the GRCA. It really covers well the basic question or issue.

************
The definition of retail pet stores (which are still exempt under the regulations) reads, in relevant part, "retail pet store means a place of business or residence at which the seller, buyer, and the animal available for sale are physically present so that every buyer may personally observe the animal prior to purchasing and/or taking custody of that animal after purchase. . . ."

All the other exemptions are for those who do not meet the basic definition. People who do not ship animals have had nothing change. In addition the buyer is not necessarily the ultimate owner of the animal. It can be someone representing the ultimate owner who is the buyer for purposes of the regulations.

What that means is that as long as the transaction is done face to face, there are no limits to the number of intact bitches you may own, and no limit to the number of puppies you sell. Their recognition that the "buyer" may not be the ultimate owner is to allow for transfers to occur when people cannot travel to pick up pups. But shipping sight unseen will cause you to lose your exemption.

Dogs sold for hunting or breeding are already exempt and continue to be. Concerns about rare breeds being shipped for genetic diversity would fall under the sale for breeding.
**************


----------



## frontier (Nov 3, 2003)

Eric Johnson said:


> This was written by Barb Reichman, the Legislative Liaison of the GRCA. It really covers well the basic question or issue.
> 
> ************
> The definition of retail pet stores (which are still exempt under the regulations) reads, in relevant part, "retail pet store means a place of business or residence at which the seller, buyer, and the animal available for sale are physically present so that every buyer may personally observe the animal prior to purchasing and/or taking custody of that animal after purchase. . . ."
> ...


Eric, I thought that it was also clarified that the buyer representative could not be someone being paid to transport the dog, i.e. ground transport. Was that your understanding?


----------



## Eric Johnson (Dec 23, 2004)

My notes are unclear on this. They did clearly say that a scheme could be worked to create a buyer's agent but they moved on after stating it and didn't clarify "how?". There are some copies of the conference around and I was going to listen again this w/e. If so, I'll let you know.

Meant to ask...do you know Dan and Sharon Kauzlarich with their Boykins? They also have Tollers and are good friends.


----------



## jax (May 18, 2010)

I read the following in an AKC email:
The rule expands USDA oversight of pet breeders to include people who maintain at least five “breeding females” of any species AND sell one pet “sight unseen.”

So if you own 4 or less breeding females nothing changes correct? You can sell dogs without a face to face meeting and you can ship them as well correct? And still be exempt from usda?


----------



## frontier (Nov 3, 2003)

NAIA's synopsis
http://www.naiaonline.org/articles/article/the-retail-pet-store-final-rule-and-you#KeyFacts


----------

