« It's funny 'cause it's true. | Main | Kitty adoption update, push polls, and PeTA! »



Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Dr Arnold L. Goldman

Thanks. Pet "overpopulation' will never be solved without an epidemiologic approach to the problem, one based in science instead of solely emotion.
The solution cannot be focused on the individual 1 or 10 animals, but always about the 10,000 or 100,000 per state yet to be born, 5 years out, 10 years out and 20 years out.

I firmly believe that interstate trafficking in dogs enables states in the south and midwest to
avoid expending scarce resources on public education and animal control. The media further abets this by making it seem as if the rescue industry is an acceptable and sufficient outlet for some states ongoing irresponsibility. We hope that the contemplated future regulation here, creates enough "upstream pressure" in the exporting states, that a public outcry in those exporting states finally develops. That outcry will be what finally motivates their politicians and sets the stage for tax dollars to be applied appropriately. It's well past time for other states to live up to the northern states animal welfare and animal control standards.

T. Leigh

It's ironic and unfortunate that the ethics and laws regarding the import and export of exotic species for obvious reasons such as disease control and species displacement aren't widely applied to the distribution of domesticated animals.


All rescue groups have their dogs(and cats) examined by qualified vets and inform prospective adopters of any medical problems. Most kennels sell to any one that can afford the dog and either pick it up or arrange transport. Again the dogs are examined by qualified vets. What you have here is a group trying to protect their own income by exaggerating or possibly out right lying.


To genes: I'm a rescuer, although not for dogs and cats, and I can say that not ALL rescue groups are as ethical as you might think. Most are hard working volunteers that use thier own money to help animals in need, but not everyone is as ethical as you'd like to think.

Dr Arnold L. Goldman

Further to genes: Your implication that veterinarians are trying to somehow profit from the regulation of rescue importation is wrong and insulting. If we wanted to profit, why not just continue to allow unlimited importation with all the disease that has been arriving inside our borders. After all, we vets only make money when sick animals need care, right? The point of the regulation is that veterinarians have a duty to both the animals and to our clients who already own animals and may choose to adopt more in the future. We see the consequences of undetected or ignored medical issues and what happens when someone has not anticipated the expense and heartache of those problems. All new animal owners must have recourse when an animal arrives with hidden or unacknowledged ailments. The price of rescuers "wanting to help" comes with a responsibility to the animal and the adopter. Once the donation and the animal change hands, there remains a duty on the part of the rescue group and their agents in our state. The proposed regulatory scheme will ensure that fly by night profiteering and weekend commuter lot distribution is eliminated.
That is what will be fair to citizens of my state, to animals already here and to animals yet to arrive here. I refuse to say nothing and profit from dog trafficking when a ready solution that levels the playing field is so easily established.


I have adopted 3 full bred Greyhounds in the last 7 years at the cost of $275 each. Each one had all their vaccinations and rabies up to date, were spayed or nuetered, were wormed, and one needed an amputation. All medical was provided by the adoption group BEFORE I adopted. They must be financial wizards if they made a dime off of me or my pups. Now the interstate health certificates and vet checks will be nullified by Ct and 2 new vet checks will need to be performed in CT within the first 15 days with a third every 90 days thereafter. Someone is going to make a profit and I'm sure it won't be the legit rescues.

25 years ago, most Greyhounds were "disposed of". The State Agriculture depts. were the ones overseeing the racing industry. Greyhounds were considered livestock and were not protected by any laws. They did a bang up job. Since then, breeders, tracks, and adoption groups banded together in search of a better solution. Now the majority of these beautiful animals are placed in loving homes. There are no tracks left in CT so all greyhounds are "imported". Tracks are closing, pups are in need of homes. Are we going back to the Good Ole days?

This law paints all rescues with the same broad brush. The legit rescues will follow the rules, struggle financially, and close. The void will be filled with the rescues who don't follow the rules. The pups will pay the price...

The comments to this entry are closed.

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner


Support NAIA!

Tip Jar

Become a Fan