While the ASPCA defines a puppy mill as “a large-scale commercial dog breeding operation where profit is given priority over the well-being of the dogs,” there is no official definition of “puppy mill” in the legal world. This is one of the reasons why it has been so difficult to create laws that crack down on puppy mills. Also, it’s important to note that the commercial breeding of dogs is regulated on the federal level and on the state level—but only in some states (see interactive U.S. map of state dog breeding laws).
Furthermore, some commercial breeders who sell directly to the public—including those who sell puppies online—fall into a large regulatory loophole. The federal government doesn't require them to be licensed, as it considers these breeders “retailers,” and thus the responsibility of the state—but states often categorize these operations as being primarily “breeders,” not retailers. The result is that no one regulates these facilities. There are no inspections, no standards that they are required to meet and no consequences for providing inadequate care. As Internet purchases of puppies increase, more and more breeders are using this loophole to get around regulation and inspection. Lack of enforcement by the USDA and state departments of agriculture means thousands of dogs are left to suffer in inadequate and inhumane conditions.
The laws discussed below, which concern puppy mill-related standards and rules, are civil laws—they are distinct from animal cruelty laws, which are criminal laws. For clarity, a similar application of civil law is how restaurants are regulated by their state’s health department. Restaurants that violate health codes can be cited, just like commercial kennels that violate kennel standards.
Federal Laws
The Animal Welfare Act
The Animal Welfare Act (AWA), a federal law passed in 1966, regulates certain animal activities, including commercial dog and cat breeding. The AWA defines the minimum standards of care for dogs, cats and certain other species of animals bred for commercial resale and exhibition. It also requires that certain commercial breeders be licensed and routinely inspected by the United State Department of Agriculture (USDA). However, violations regularly go unpunished, and there are innumerable loopholes and faults within the current system. For example, only animal-breeding businesses considered "wholesale" operations—those that sell animals to stores for resale—are overseen by the USDA. The AWA does not apply to facilities that sell directly to the public, including the thousands that now do so via the Internet. Read more about the Animal Welfare Act.
The 2008 Farm Bill
With the evolution of Internet commerce, puppy mills have sprouted up all over the world to provide poorly bred puppies of every imaginable breed and designer mix directly to the consumer. As a result, the U.S. market was flooded with imported dogs in bad health and/or possibly carrying diseases that could harm people and other animals. Because foreign puppy mills are not subject to U.S. regulations—such as the standards set forth in the Animal Welfare Act—many of these dogs are bred and raised in extremely inhumane conditions.
In a major victory, in May 2008 the ASPCA and other animal welfare groups successfully fought for an amendment to Congress’s 2008 Farm Bill that prohibits the importation of puppies under six months of age for the purpose of resale.
The 2008 Puppy Uniform Protection Statute (did not pass)
In September 2008, the Puppy Uniform Protection Statute (PUPS), or “Baby’s Bill” (in honor of Baby, a three-legged puppy mill survivor), was introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives by Reps. Sam Farr (D-CA), Jim Gerlach (R-PA), Lois Capps (D-CA) and Terry Everett (R-AL). The bill, numbered H.R. 6949, quickly achieved the bipartisan support of 19 co-sponsors representing districts across the nation. A companion bill, S. 3519, was introduced in the Senate by Senator Richard Durbin (D-IL) and three co-sponsors. This legislation sought to close the loophole in the Animal Welfare Act that allows commercial breeders who sell puppies online and directly to the public to escape licensing and regulation. It also would have required all dogs held by licensed breeders to be exercised out of their cages daily. Because of its late introduction, Baby’s Bill did not have a chance to pass during the 110th session of Congress (2007-2008). However, the introduction of federal puppy mill legislation is a major landmark unto itself.
The 2010 Puppy Uniform Protection and Safety Act (did not pass)
In May 2010, a new version of PUPS called the Puppy Uniform Protection and Safety Act was introduced in both chambers by Senators Richard Durbin (D-IL) and David Vitter (R-LA) and Rep. Sam Farr (D-CA). Similar to its predecessor, PUPS 2010 (S. 3424/H.R. 5434) would have required any breeder who sells or offers to sell more than 50 dogs annually directly to the public—including over the Internet—to be licensed and inspected. The bill would also have required all dog breeders licensed under the federal Animal Welfare Act to exercise every dog every day, including allowing the dogs to reach a running stride without the use of treadmills or similar devices. By the end of 2010, the PUPS Act had 19 cosponsors in the Senate and 150 cosponsors in the House, a very respectable increase from the 23 House cosponsors it had at end of 2008.
The 2011 Puppy Uniform Protection and Safety Act (pending)
On March 1, 2011, Representative Representatives Jim Gerlach (R-PA), Sam Farr (D-CA), Lois Capps (D-CA) and C.W. Bill Young (R-FL) introduced the PUPS Act for the third time in three consecutive sessions. Again, if passed the Act will bring all commercial dog breeders in the United States under federal oversight and mandate daily exercise. Please help the ASPCA secure passage of the PUPS Act—contact your federal legislators now.
State Laws
States have the power to legislate higher standards of humane care for commercially bred animals over and above the bare minimums required by the federal Animal Welfare Act. But for a long time, puppy mills were not considered an important issue. This has changed in recent years. In 2008, Virginia became the first state to pass a law limiting the number of adult dogs a commercial breeder may possess at any one time (that limit is 50). The bill went from introduction in the Virginia Legislature to the governor’s desk in just four months. Louisiana also passed a law in 2008 to limit the total number of animals a commercial breeder may possess, and in 2009, Oregon and Washington State followed suit. As the voting public continues to become more vocal in its objection to the plight of puppy mill dogs, political action and legislator support will only increase in the years to come.
Unfortunately, some states have absolutely no laws on the books addressing the “commercial use of dogs”—an umbrella phrase that includes pet stores, breeders, kennels and dealers. Among the states that do regulate, each government defines the preceding terms differently. To fully understand how producers and sellers of puppies are regulated in each state, careful attention must be paid to each law’s precise wording. To learn how your state stacks up, see a table of state laws concerning breeders, kennels and puppy mills.
Nearly 20 states also have laws dictating how old a puppy must be before he or she may be offered for sale or adopted out to an owner. You may read more about this issue here, and see a table of state laws regarding the minimum age to sell a puppy here.
Laws to Protect Consumers
If you buy a puppy from a pet shop, you run a high risk of taking home a sick animal. Respiratory infections including pneumonia, as well as hereditary defects like hip dysplasia and severe allergies, are common among the indiscriminately bred puppies sold by commercial breeders. If you have purchased a pet-store puppy who turned out to be sick, you have may have some recourse—as of January 2010, 20 states have enacted laws, commonly called “Lemon Laws,” that make pet stores financially responsible for sick animals purchased from them. See a state-by-state list of Lemon Laws and know your rights.
The ASPCA’s Involvement with Puppy Mill Legislation
For many years, the ASPCA’s Government Relations department has been active in drafting and promoting legislation that would strengthen regulations and raise minimum standard of care for dogs in puppy mills. For instance, in 2008 we helped write Pennsylvania House Bills 2525 and 2532, landmark legislation to prohibit some of the worst abuses in Pennsylvania’s commercial dog kennels and strengthen enforcement of the state’s animal cruelty law. Pennsylvania House Bill 2525 was passed in October 2008 and signed into law by Governor Ed Rendell almost immediately. In 2009, we were particulary active in Connecticut and Tennessee, and in 2010, we worked to pass a puppy mill-related ballot initiative in Missouri, a.k.a. the "Puppy Mill Capital of the U.S."
The ASPCA will continue to tackle puppy mills on both the state and national levels while maintaining our mission to raise awareness and educate the public. Recent national media attention to puppy mills has created a strong momentum, and there has been a spike in requests from legislators to the ASPCA to help draft, introduce and pass puppy mill legislation.
“In terms of where we will take the fight next, there are many factors that could shape our plans,” says Cori Menkin, ASPCA Senior Director, Puppy Mills Campaign. “An area’s political climate or available resources can dictate how much success we can achieve on an issue. This might mean having to hold off on battling in certain areas that have very high concentrations of puppy mills, and instead focusing on where there is the most potential for change. We know that the road might be long, but we are hopeful that if we keep enlightening more and more people about puppy mills, the desire to push for stronger laws to protect the dogs will become contagious.”
|
Search (or Content or Material) provided in conjuction with |
 |