Anyone who sells horses. . .contact your representatives

Miniature Horse Talk Forums

Help Support Miniature Horse Talk Forums:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Flying minis

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 18, 2010
Messages
489
Reaction score
34
Location
Northwest Iowa
Read the below. Essentially, if you sell and animal where the buyer does not come to your house (so either site unseen, or you deliver it, or meet them somewhere) the following animal regulations would apply - meaning you have to be licensed, inspected, etc.

Contact your representatives. . . this could be a BIG impact to those who sell online! It is not yet final - it is out for comment, so the time to contact your representatives is NOW.

Proposed APHIS rule raises Animal Ag Alliance concern

Animal Agriculture Alliance | Updated: July 24, 2012

The USDA’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) has proposed a revision of regulations implementing the Animal Welfare Act (AWA) to redefine "retail pet store," according to a press release from the Animal Agriculture Alliance. The proposed rule would expand the number and type of animal breeding and husbandry facilities requiring licensure, inspection, and recordkeeping under AWA.

“The rule has been brought to the Alliance's attention by members who believe it is poorly written and needs to be clarified or thrown out,” according to the press release.

While the rule appears to be focused on pet breeders, farmers and ranchers could also be impacted. As it is written, if a farmer or breeder sells even one animal as a "pet" in a situation where the buyer does not come to their home, farm or place of business, they must become USDA licensed. “A farmer selling an animal for purposes such as 4-H projects could potentially come under the impact of the rule,” according to the Alliance.

In addition to the requirement that dealers obtain a USDA license (with annual costs between $30 and $750), licensed dealers are also subject to regulatory requirements for standards of care and unannounced inspections by APHIS personnel. APHIS is authorized to seek civil monetary penalties for violations of animal care standards of up to $10,000 per day, per animal.

Under certain circumstances, APHIS may also seize animals or work with state and local authorities to seize animals. While livestock used for food production are not included in this rule, it potentially does present an opportunity for APHIS inspectors to gain access to agricultural operations, which is unprecedented.

This regulation will affect anybody intending to bring home a pet. The animals included under this regulation consists of: dogs, cats, rabbits, guinea pigs, hamsters, gerbils, rats, mice, gophers, chinchilla, domestic ferrets, domestic farm animals, birds, and cold-blooded species. Also affected are: rescuers, foster homes, service animals, guide dogs for the blind, sportsmen, military dogs, and any other groups that “sell” animals.

According to the Alliance, farmers and ranchers should “educate themselves on the issue and take action.”

Comments on this proposed rule have been extended by USDA until Aug. 15.

Additional information and sample comments can be accessed online.

Read the Alliance's comments on the proposed rule.

Submit comments to USDA by Aug. 15 here.
 
Considering all the other business expenses I have, this does not seem terrible to me. If the law would curtain some of the "puppy mill" horse breeders and reduce the number of abused and starving animals, I am not sure it would be a bad thing. Go ahead, flame away.
 
Just the government taking away more freedoms
default_sad.png
I'll be selling off my herd if this happens as I rent and don't own. Even though I feel they are in suitable pens that get cleaned every day and they all get fed very well, I wouldn't find it fair that the quality of my operation would be judged on the quality of someone else’s property.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I have sold most of my horses over the years via the internet, and most all of them went out of state, with no way that a buyer would be able to come to my house and personally purchase the horse. This is a ridiculous bill that needs to be thrown out. I am all for regulating or abolishing puppy mills, but this impacts EVERYONE and folks that should not even be included. If its for the benefits of regulating puppy mills, then a bill needs to be written just for that, not to every animal owner in the U.S. And I dont feel the need for them all to be 'licensed' either. This is just another huge infringement on MY freedoms.
 
Thanks for the info, this is something new that I will need to look into. In my state of Maryland, and I'm sure many in my state don't even know this, if you sell more then five animals per year you must have a license and it cost $80 per yr. Since I know about it I keep it below that amount. We also have many laws pertaining to free range chickens, manure disposal, etc. that are already crazy! We also had to buy additional commercial farm insurance this yr. since we sell, and hardly anyone comes to the farm, but Oh well it is what it is.
 
It's being done in kind of an interesting way - they are simply revising the definitions in an existing law is my undertanding. . .but in so doing, they either have not looked at the unintended consequences, or there's an alternative agenda to bring domestic livestock producers under the same regulations as pet breeders.
 
Considering all the other business expenses I have, this does not seem terrible to me. If the law would curtain some of the "puppy mill" horse breeders and reduce the number of abused and starving animals, I am not sure it would be a bad thing. Go ahead, flame away.
If I thought this would actually do that, I'd be fine with it. But the existing bills sure haven't stopped the actual puppy mills, so I'm kind of doubting this would make any difference to the horse or livestock breeders who are bad breeders. I'm afraid all it would do is cause many good breeders extra money and hassle in dealing with inspectors and regulatory agencies, who have their own - often uninformed and unrealistic - views of what makes good animal husbandry and animal welfare practices.
 
I have sold most of my horses over the years via the internet, and most all of them went out of state, with no way that a buyer would be able to come to my house and personally purchase the horse. This is a ridiculous bill that needs to be thrown out. I am all for regulating or abolishing puppy mills, but this impacts EVERYONE and folks that should not even be included. If its for the benefits of regulating puppy mills, then a bill needs to be written just for that, not to every animal owner in the U.S. And I dont feel the need for them all to be 'licensed' either. This is just another huge infringement on MY freedoms.
I totally agree Laurie! I'm all for regulating overproduction but this is overstepping boundaries in a big way.
 
TargetsMom, I would never flame you. You have to be one of the most helpful people around and also one of the most involved with bettering the lives of minis and people's understanding of our fabulous tiny horses.

I think this is an awful law. Maybe if you breed and sell more than a certain number of horses a year, it could apply but for a small, hobby breeder who has the occasional foal this law makes no sense.

It's severely limiting free enterprise for both buyer and seller and really, in the end, will it help our horses?
 
I would strongly suspect the strong possibility of an 'alternative agenda'....

Margo
 
I started reading through this link and I still don't understand how horses could fit in this proposal. I could see how my goat would considering he wears a form of identification and he is only a pet and companion. Also there are many horses out there that are still used primarily for work ONLY and are not pets. So I do believe there needs to be some sort of line drawn for what they consider farm animal pets in this proposal.
 
This really doesn't make sense to me, what is it protecting? You just can't declare anything as "pets"? Also rescues will be involved and I agree that rescues should be looked into from time to time to make sure the animals are in good care but not make it difficult for them. I do think there needs to be some regulation but using the pet route just doesn't make any sense to me.
 
They have already tried passing laws to have ALL your livestock, down to your chickens microchipped to track down 'health issues' like mad cow, etc.... so why would that include domestic horses too? We were going to have to call for permission every time an animal left your property- so every time you go to a show or event, etc.. or do ANYTHING, you were to be required to call in. Thank heavens that got shot down. My understanding is that there is another bill similar to this out there right now trying to be passed again. The gov't wanted a count on everything you owned. Ha, this way perhaps they can figure out a way to tax things, or better yet, confiscate when they felt like it. Our freedoms here are getting more and more crunched- and I need some 'elbow room'. I am getting sick of all these ridiculous bills that do not affect the criminals or offenders, it just makes life more miserable for everyone else trying to have a pleasant life. Ok, off my soap box for now, lol
 
Yes this smacks of USDA trying to gain control - they couldn't get it done with animal identification, but they could start in with this. I would urge everyone to contact their reps and congress reps, we have way more to worry about than this.
 
Back
Top