Vote for BP.Net for the 2013 Forum of the Year! Click here for more info.

» Site Navigation

» Home
 > FAQ

» Online Users: 2,758

0 members and 2,758 guests
No Members online
Most users ever online was 6,337, 01-24-2020 at 04:30 AM.

» Today's Birthdays

None

» Stats

Members: 75,034
Threads: 248,490
Posts: 2,568,459
Top Poster: JLC (31,651)
Welcome to our newest member, jeremymichels
Results 1 to 3 of 3
  1. #1
    BPnet Veteran neilgolli's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-06-2007
    Posts
    648
    Thanks
    209
    Thanked 117 Times in 50 Posts
    Images: 30

    THANK YOU PIJAC once again......

    http://hosted.verticalresponse.com/...503/d2a9275492/

    "Farm Bill Veto is Overridden: PIJAC Prevails on Pet Provisions

    In recent years the Farm Bill has become a popular vehicle for seeking to move pet trade legislation, as opposed to promoting such initiatives in stand-alone legislative bills. As a result, the pet industry has been required to closely monitor the extensive amendments that are always put forward for inclusion in this voluminous legislation. PIJAC was closely involved in provisions of this year’s Farm Bill (the Food, Conservation and Energy Act of 2008) with potential to impact the pet trade, and was successful in defending pet industry interests. Among the amendments that had been on the table was language that could dramatically impact the reptile trade and Animal Welfare Act (AWA) provisions barring puppy imports. Although President Bush’s opposition to the final version of the Farm Bill resulted in an executive veto, veto-proof majorities with which the bill passed in both houses of Congress held up, and the House of Representatives overrode the president’s veto 316 to 108, while the Senate delivered an even more convincing vote of 82 to 13 in rejecting the veto.

    Because legislation this size is routinely amended with myriad provisions, PIJAC closely tracked the bill throughout the legislative process. As originally adopted by the House, the Farm Bill was free of onerous provisions impacting the pet trade. Amendments on the Senate side, however, threatened two segments of the industry: reptiles and puppies.

    The Senate amendment mandating a determination as to the “prevalence of salmonella in each species of reptile and amphibian sold legally as a pet in the United States” was intended to counter the longstanding prohibition against the sale of turtles under 4 inches in the United States. Unfortunately, because of the manner in which this provision was crafted, it would have had the opposite effect, creating a ban against countless other reptile species without doing anything to further the legalization of pet turtles. As a result, PIJAC was compelled to aggressively oppose the amendment when the Farm Bill went to conference committee. Indeed, had the measure passed in the final version of the Farm Bill, the Food and Drug Administration may have been required by law to ban the sale of virtually every pet reptile species in the country. PIJAC was successful in having this amendment stricken from the conference report, and it was not part of the final version of the bill passed by Congress.

    PIJAC was also aggressive in responding to an amendment to ban the import of all puppies less than 6 months of age for sale as pets. PIJAC opposed this proposal in principle because there is no evidence that the age of imported puppies (which are already required by law to be at least 8 weeks of age before transport) had any relation to the dog’s health or welfare. However, the amendment promised relatively little effect on the pet trade, except for the state of Hawaii, which is rabies-free and therefore cannot being puppies in from anywhere in the continental United States. Thus, the amendment would have had a devastating impact on pet stores selling puppies, as well as the pet-owning public who would have been deprived of a legitimate source for healthy pets.

    As a result of extensive negotiations with Senator Richard Durbin (D-IL), the amendment’s sponsor, as well as intensive lobbying of members of Congress, an exemption for Hawaii imports was developed and inserted into the bill. This exemption survived the conference committee, and the ban in the final bill does not apply to the “lawful importation of a dog into the state of Hawaii from the British Isles, Australia, Guam, or New Zealand in compliance with the applicable regulations of the State of Hawaii and the other requirements of this section.” "
    Support my efforts to raise awareness and donations to the Alzheimer's Association in honor of my Grandfather Eugene......
    www.awalktoendalzheimers.com

    "No man's life, liberty or fortune is safe while our legislature is in session." - Benjamin Franklin

  2. #2
    BPnet Veteran Patrick Long's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-16-2005
    Location
    Ventura, California, United States
    Posts
    8,209
    Thanks
    564
    Thanked 987 Times in 736 Posts
    Images: 36

    Re: THANK YOU PIJAC once again......

    So this "farm Bill" is what we all wanted not to be passed? I didnt know it was grouped together like that.

  3. #3
    BPnet Veteran Schlyne's Avatar
    Join Date
    10-01-2004
    Location
    Omaha, NE
    Posts
    2,974
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
    Images: 2

    Re: THANK YOU PIJAC once again......

    No, that's a seperate issue. One of the measures in the farm bill was to allow the legalization of turtles for sale under 4 inches..it was not worded correctly and would have outlawed a lot of reptile sales instead.
    Check out my gallery! www.schlyne.deviantart.com I am not really active on forums anymore, but I am on facebook.
    Please Click the Dragon eggs/hatchlings!

    All of my Dragons can be seen here http://dragcave.ath.cx/user/48959

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v4.2.1