This article first appeared in the St. Louis Beacon, Nov. 8, 2010 - When the Missouri Legislature reconvenes in January, Rep. Ed Schieffer of Troy has a list of changes he would like to see made to Proposition B, the so-called puppy mill measure narrowly approved by voters last week.
Schieffer, a Democrat who sits on the House Agriculture Policy committee, says he knows that Prop B passed with 51.6 percent. But, he notes, it lost in his 11th District, as it did in most of the state, carrying a majority only because it won big in the St. Louis and Kansas City areas.
"I'm going to vote my district," Schieffer said in a telephone interview Monday. He won re-election last week with 55.9 percent of the vote. "I always have voted my district, and I will continue to vote my district."
Proposition B limits large-scale breeding operations to no more than 50 dogs and imposes other conditions such as regulating the size of the cages that the dogs may be kept in; requiring that the animals get adequate food, water and shelter as well as proper veterinary care; and making sure the dogs get proper exercise. It does not apply to hunting dogs.
Schieffer says he doesn't want puppy mills in Missouri any more than anyone else does, but he thinks it's a "high probability" that changes will be made in the law because "quite frankly, as it's worded now, it would put lots of legitimate dog breeders out of business."
Among the changes Schieffer says he would like to see, based on conversations with his constituents, are:
- Increasing the number of dogs a breeding operation may have.
- Decreasing the size of the cage that would be mandated.
- Changing requirements that dogs' quarters be kept at between 45 and 85 degrees.
- Removing the requirement that dogs be exercised regularly, which he says has been interpreted as three hours each day.
"That's humanly impossible, to give each dog three hours of exercise a day," Schieffer said. "Very few people who own pets exercise them that much."
Proponents of Prop B have said that because voters have said they want its provisions to go into effect, lawmakers should not take it upon themselves to make wholesale changes. But Schieffer said he is just looking out for breeders who he says run the kind of operations that mean good business for Missouri.
"We are looking for a way to keep legitimate, good dog breeders in business," he said.
He is also concerned, despite assurances to the contrary by the Humane Society and other backers of Proposition B, that the changes in regulations for dog breeders are just a first step toward imposing stringent rules on other industries as well. Schieffer said that the largest business in his district is an egg producer, and he doesn't want to see it hurt.
"Extreme animal rights activists in California went from dogs to the poultry industry," he said. "I hear that in California, eggs cost you four dollars a dozen. People in this district can't afford to pay that for eggs."
Another opponent of Proposition B, the Missouri Farm Bureau, holds its annual meeting next month where it will go through its process to entertain policy resolutions from its members.
Kelly Smith, its director of marketing and commodities who was the Farm Bureau's point person on Proposition B during the campaign, said the bureau has not yet engaged lawmakers in any conversations about possible changes to the newly enacted law, which takes effect next November
"We are a member organization," smith said. "We have a grassroots policy development process, and our members would make that decision, if any decision were to be made.
"There's always the possibility that somebody might being up discussions about it at our annual meeting where we do make our policy. We have to let our members decide. I can guarantee that if there is a concern, our members are not bashful about voicing our opinions."