Your Opinion: Shelters should share fees
Wednesday, October 26, 2011
Throughout the year-long debate about Prop. B (the dog bill) one thing was evident — the Humane Society of the United States and Barb Schmitz had no room for compromise.
All large scale dog breeders were lumped into the same category — licensed, unlicensed, good and bad and the restrictions and regulations they convinced Missouri voters to foist on those dog breeders were unreasonable and only designed to put all breeders out of business.
Thanks to the mediation of the state Legislature, the total havoc that Prop. B (as it was) would have wrecked on the good licensed breeders was averted.
One of the provisions of Prop. B that was adopted was the need for more inspectors.
More inspectors required more revenue at a time when our state was facing a tough economy (still is).
The $2,500 licensing fee was designed to pay for those extra inspectors.
Missouri’s non-profit animal shelters and rescue groups are also under the jurisdiction and inspection of the Missouri Department of Agriculture, as well they should be. After all, oversight is required for shelters also because of the volume of animals — mostly dogs — that they handle.
Just as not all breeding facilities are good, the same can be said for shelters. There are some that are good — some are bad. Because their heart is in the right place doesn’t mean they can dance around the rules.
Barb Schmitz thinks that it is not fair. Lot’s of things are nor fair. Be careful what you wish for!
As for the tax incentives, they do cost the state money in the long run. If the people who voted for Prop. B need a tax incentive to adopt, then maybe they aren’t animal lovers you thought and if they all stepped up and donated more to their local shelters a lot of problems would be solved.
More like this story
Use the comment form below to begin a discussion about this content.
Please review our Policies and Procedures before registering or commenting