~
~ ~
The Macro-Economic
Effect of PAWS on Dog and Cat Suppliers
One is left with the inevitable
question: what makes AKC think that
Congress will leave PAWS alone? Congress
has amended the AWA four times since
its initial adoption, while the USDA,
in sharp contrast, has kept hobby breeders'
exemption in place untouched for 35
years.
AKC does not answer this
question. When asked about the potential
for future regulatory expansion - such
as reducing the sales exemption fiom
25 animals to 20, or the breeder exemption
from 6 litters to 4, or removing the
word "other" from the $500
"other animal" sales cap,
their stock response is that they support
PAWS in its current form. In other words,
AKC cannot answer the question because
there is only one answer, and it leads
to the inevitable conclusion that PAWS
is an inherent danger to all hobby breeders.
The answer is: further expansion of
PAWS is not only likely, it is historically
predicted.
What happens, then, as
the percentage of hobby breeders subject
to regulation grows and grows over the
next decade? PAWS certainly cannot be
argued to effect the demand for dogs
and cats in the United States. That
demand is likely to continue apace.
What, then, is PAWS likely to do on
the supply side?
Hobby breeders know that
to breed dogs and cats responsibly,
to improve the breed and one's breeding
stock, means to forego making breeding
and sales decisions that are driven
by increasing marginal profitability
on the sales of animals. This factor
is why people are willing to pay higher
prices for animals bred by reputable
hobby breeders, rather than to purchase
from commercial retail stores or through
disreputable "backyard" breeders.
Even at the higher prices received upon
the sale of an animal by reputable hobby
breeders, few if any report that they
make any profit fiom a litter. The cost
of goods sold is prohibitive to obtaining
positive net operating income if breeding
is done correctly.
As greater regulations
are piled onto hobby breeders who breed
in their homes under PAWS and because
of PAWS, and as greater numbers of hobby
breeders are subject to regulation through
amendment of the AWA and of state and
local regulations that are adopted given
the green light that PAWS affords, the
effect on financial and privacy concerns
will cause large numbers of current
hobby breeders to scale back and eventually
stop breeding altogether.
This effect on American
hobby breeders will be exacerbated by
the opposite effect that PAWS and its
progeny will have on breeders in Mexico
and Caribbean countries, and commercial
establishments in the United States
that have the financial resources and
incentive to circumvent the AWA after
PAWS. Taking advantage of the deleterious
effect that PAWS will have on legitimate
hobby breeders in this country, these
off-shore and out-sourced suppliers
of dogs and cats will be able to supply
the needs of the American consumer by
sales over the internet - the purported
rationale advanced by Dr. Holt for AKC's
support of PAWS in the first place.
Yet these breeding operations - which
already exist and have been found to
be operating at supplying dogs and cats
through some venues in the U.S. already
- are beyond the jurisdiction of the
USDA to inspect their facilities in
order to promote animal welfare. The
AWA was passed just for that purpose
- to protect the welfare of animals
in large, wholesale facilities. As the
USDA demonstrated already in response
to the DDAL's Petition for Rule-Making
Change, discussed earlier, retail sellers
of dogs and cats do not need federal
regulation because they are self-regulating.
Buyers can inspect how dogs and cats
are raised by hobby breeders.
Not so after PAWS. As
the supply of dogs and cats shifts to
Mexico and the Caribbean, retail buyers
will make their choices over the internet,
having no idea how their eagerly-awaited
puppy or kitten has been raised. The
damaging effect that this will have
on animal welfare and on rescuers who
will have a tremendous time placing
dogs and cats of poor temperaments is
impossible to underestimate.
PAWS therefore has the
potential to radically alter, in the
medium and long-term, the macro-economic
markets for dog and cat sales in the
United States in a manner that will
negatively effect the welfare of the
animals that are present in this country.
As that happens, the ripple effect on
rescuers, and on the adoption of further
governmental restrictions at ownership
of animals can be expected to broaden.
~ ~ ~
|
