die (>r cscni'o, tliort; is ri< tiling ilio en f o i ccmfut .'i^'cncv c.nn do. And even if Llie facility 

 slips up and .idvcrtises itself as a lioa rtl i nj'. Kennel, iust about all that can be done 

 under the Animal Welfare Act is revoke his licc-n5;e nr refuse to pive him one. There is 

 no provi'.ion under the Act tc prosecute him. 



Cliaplcr 1'.) allows .myone to lnc-ed tlic offspring of 5 female dogs and 5 female cats 

 and raise tiiem witlioul icgulatlon or inriirttion ;ind ;.el 1 them to the ;)ublic. One such 

 breeder recently sold, wltli AKC pai>ers t<"i we are told, for $100 a dog that was stone 

 deaf . 



If tlie enforcement agent finds oni tlinl a jict shop has sold a sick animals, there 

 is really notliing, it tan do, since all liic simp need;; to do is say it didn't know the 

 animal was sick. Tlie burden of pioof under the law is too heavy to do much good. 



There is. no fiuiding, for the Anim.il Welfare Act as it pertains to dogs and cats 

 except wiiat is made available out of ljcen.se fees we understand. These amount Lo a 

 little over $1,000 a year, so enforcement of the Act is done by livestock inspectors 

 wlio do their best for the dogs and cats after their primary' responsibility to commercial 

 animals is through. 



From the wording of the state's anlm.il laws, we believe the General Assembly 

 has made an earnest attcmjit to provide pet owners with protective law. But experience 

 over a trial period of several years indicates that sonic clianges need to be made, and 

 certainly, provisions for enforcement and funding for enforcement must be made. 



We are very encouraged by the fact that this Study Commission is concerned about 

 these things, and will be glad to be of any assistance we can, Tiiank you. 



25 



