This is a very insightful and thorough article concerning Ohio’s infamous puppyh mill bill; I encourage those interested in animal welfare to cross-post or Tweet.
An Ohio bill dubbed the “puppy mill bill”, S.B. 95, has passed a Senate Committee by a vote of 7-1 and may be taken up by the full Senate before the summer recess.
The bill, however, is probably more aptly called the “puppy mill support and anti-rescue” bill.
Poor Puppies Slum it at This Mill
As amended by the Senate State and Local Government and Veterans Affairs Committee, S.B. 95, would create a central Kennel Control Authority that would regulate (1) all animal rescues including anyone used to foster animals in their homes, (2) all animal shelters, (3) boarding kennels, (4) dog retailers that buy or sell dogs wholesale or for resale or provide dogs to pet stores, and (5) “high volume breeders” which are defined as commercial dog breeders that produce at least 9 litters and sell 60 or more dogs each year.
S.B. 95 targets all animal rescues but only “high volume” breeders.
All animal rescues would be regulated as well as people who foster animals for non-profit rescue organizations. But other than retailers, all commercial dog breeders that produce less than 9 litters each year or sell less than 60 dogs directly to the public whether through the internet, newspaper ads or otherwise, would remain unregulated.
Certainly animal rescues should be subject to strong animal cruelty and anti-hoarding requirements and other regulations for standards of care. Under this bill there are a lot of bureaucratic requirements, a lot of paperwork, though, for rescues which are typically small organizations simply trying to save animals from pounds and shelters or situations of abuse and neglect and put them in good homes. They would even be required to provide the state with information about people who temporarily foster animals for the rescue.
And yet there is no regulation at all for backyard breeders, the many smaller puppy mills, operating throughout Ohio.
You could breed and sell 59 puppies a year over the internet or have 8 litters and sell 70 puppies and you would not be regulated. Foster one dog for your local animal rescue and you would be subject to state regulation.
The Central Kennel Control Authority would consist of a member of the state senate appointed by the president of the senate, a member of the state House of Representatives appointed by the Speaker of the House, and 7 others appointed by the governor: a county dog warden, a veterinarian, a pet store representative that is licensed as a high volume breeder or retailer, a member in good standing of a “breed parent club” of the American Kennel Club; a high volume breeder, a member of the public and just one representative of Ohio animal welfare organizations.
Enforcement
The Kennel Control Authority would issue, administer and enforce regulations. County dog wardens and humane agents would have no enforcement authority. Their role would simply be to report any violations they come across in doing their other duties and they can look at records if they like. Given that these puppy mills and retailers would be under the jurisdiction of the Kennel Control Authority, it is unlikely dog wardens or humane agents would ever be on the premises or otherwise in a position to observe anything illegal. Nor would they necessarily know if some act or omission was a violation of Kennel Control Authority regulations or whether animal cruelty laws or the KCA regulations applied. At best, their jurisdiction would be unclear. It is unlikely they would play any role in enforcement and that was admittedly the goal by proponents and dog wardens!
The primary enforcement mechanism would be inspections at least every 2 years by Kennel Control Authority inspectors for high volume breeders and on complaint for rescues and on request for retailers, those selling or buying dogs wholesale or buying dogs for resale or to pet stores. The penalties are largely civil fines imposed only after there has been an opportunity to correct violations.
A violation of KCA regulations would be a misdemeanor.
The bill provides the KCA could impound dogs if the high volume breeder, retailer or animal rescue has “materially” violates the rules and the “dog’s health or safety appears to be in imminent danger”.
The KCA director could request the attorney general file an action for an injunction for violation of the rules.
The KCA could deny, suspend or revoke a license for violations that “materially” threaten the “health or welfare of a dog”. It is not clear what “materially” means or what is meant by a threat to the “health or welfare of a dog”.
The bill also provides a licensing and registration scheme with background checks, and applicants must be denied if they have been convicted of violation of animal cruelty and animal fighting laws in the past 20 years. Curiously, there is no bar to breeders found in violation of other animal protection laws such as USDA or other state breeder regulations. Also, an initial inspection would not be required for issuance of a license. A license could be issued, in part, on the basis of photographs of the breeder’s facility. Photographs submitted by the breeder.
The problem of self-funding
Proponents say that the Kennel Control Authority would be self-funding, meaning it would depend on the puppy mill industry particularly those “high volume breeders” to stay in business and supply the licensing fees and civil fines that will, in turn, maintain the bureaucracy of the KCA.
In the end, the bill provides little or no incentive to stop or limit high volume breeders. The KCA’s existence would require that puppy mills proliferate.
Also, it is unlikely to be self-funded. There would be substantial start up costs for exclusive regulation of the thousands of high volume breeders, dog retailers, animal rescues and shelters, and boarding kennels in the state. (Go to www.holmescountyexposed.com for a look at the numbers of commercial dog breeders in just one Ohio county.)
S.B. 95 contains “consumer protection provisions” that would require pet stores to provide buyers with a veterinarian’s statement that the dog has no evidence of disease or physical deformity and a money back guarantee valid for at least 21 days if the buyer presents within 14 days of sale a veterinarian’s statement the dog has a “significant” disease, illness or injury that was in existence at the time of purchase. It is not clear what is meant by “significant.”
Pet stores would be required to disclose these rights along with information about the breeder. Failure to refund a purchase price could mean damages for the buyer equal to actual expenses including “reasonable veterinary” bills, attorney’s fees and costs. And the buyer could keep the dog.
It is not clear what happens to the dog or who pays the vet bills if the store opts to refund the purchase price within the required time.
Information about the dog’s breeders and prior owners would be required to be provided to those purchasing directly from high volume breeders.
All advertisements and solicitations for business would be required to contain the breeder or retailer’s vendor and license
Ohio Amish People Are Infamous for Their Disgusting Mill Businesses
numbers. The bill states the KCA will “work in conjunction with” the Dept. of Taxation to facilitate collection of sales taxes.
Standards of care
There are a number of other generally stated requirements in the bill that relate to care of the dogs: Cages could have no more than 3 dogs to a cage – 4×4 feet for up to 3 dogs less than 20 lbs, 4×6 feet for 3 dogs weighing 20-60 lbs. and for up to 3 dogs 51 pounds or more, 4×8 feet. There is no specific height requirement, however. Outdoor exercise areas could either be attached to the cage or separate. If separate, dogs must be allowed there at least 2 hours each day. If attached the exercise areas must be 4×8 feet for up to 3 dogs weighing less than 20 lbs; 4×12 feet for up to 3 dogs that are between 20-50 lbs; and 4×16 feet for up to 3 dogs weighing 51 pounds or more…Not enough area for any dog to reach a running stride and pretty crowded for play or other exercise.
If the exercise area is not attached to the cage where the dog is kept, it must be 10×10 for up to 3 dogs weighing less than 20 lbs.; 20×20 for up to 3 dogs that are between 20-50 lbs; and 40×40 feet for up to 3 dogs weighing more than 50 pounds.
Still no height requirement and still not enough room to run. Take a look at a federal bill just introduced that would require that dogs held by commercial dog breeders have enough room to reach a “running stride”.
Indoor areas used for exercise would be required to be the same size as those that are outside. High volume breeders would not be required to provide exercise to dogs that are ill or “for which exercise would be detrimental to recovering from illness”. There is no requirement that a veterinarian make this determination.
Cages could be stacked as long as nothing can fall through to the cage below. Metal caging must be coated with rubber or plastic.
There are requirements for providing straw for warmth for those dogs kept in outdoor enclosures. There are also requirements for providing shade in the summer months and shelter “from the elements.” Temperatures for dogs kept indoors would be required to be kept between 50 degrees and 90 degrees F. Pretty vague standards for dogs kept outside in Ohio’s cold winters and hot summers.
Dogs would be required to be provided with “appropriate veterinary care and treatment for any disease, illness or injury.” Dogs must be provided a veterinary exam before breeding each year. Puppies would be required to have “appropriate” vaccinations.
There are very general requirements for sanitation, avoiding infestation, injury, and contagious illness; separating dogs that are not compatible, cleaning, ventilation, grooming, providing “clean unfrozen” water and “adequate and wholesome” food, and waste disposal.
Euthanasia would be required to be performed by a licensed veterinarian as well as tail docking, ear cropping, declawing or debarking. There is no requirement for anesthesia in performing debarking, for example, which was recently banned as cruel in Massachusetts.
**Animal rescues could be made to comply with these requirements.**
Dog auctions ALLOWED under S.B. 95
Another Ohio Mill Means More Lives Lost
An earlier version of S.B. 95 banned dog auctions, raffles and roadside sales of dogs. Dog auctions would be legal, however, under the version approved by the committee. This despite an effort that is underway now to gather signatures to put an initiative on the November ballot that would allow Ohio voters to ban dog auctions in the state.
There is no restriction in this bill on dog raffles, roadside sales or sales of dogs at flea markets. There are no requirements for transporting dogs. There are few record keeping requirements.
OHIO CAN DO BETTER
Puppy mills are proliferating in Ohio, and this bill, S.B. 95 is likely to do little to change that. The bill’s goal seems to be to support puppy mills, dogs trapped in cages virtually all the time, bred over and over, deprived of socialization, a family, love, normal dog behaviors like running around, sniffing, etc., and just good care. (“Adequate” seems to be the standard set by this bill for care of dogs, whatever that means, and which is unlikely to be enforced in any event.)
There is an alternative, McKenzie’s Law. For more information and how you can help pass this bill….
Visit Holmes County Exposed for more on puppy mills in Ohio
Visit Ban Ohio Dog Auctions for more on the effort to ban dog auctions in the state and how you can help!
**This article and some photos were printed courtesy AnimalLawCoalition.com. Some photos courtesy HolmesCountyExposed.
Loading ...
The ballot measure is backed by HSUS, Farm Sanctuary, the Consumer Federation of America, the Center for Science in the Public Interest, the Ohio SPCA, the Toledo Area Humane Society, the Geauga Humane Society, the Humane Society of Greater Dayton, Medina County SPCA, Mercy For Animals, and a quickly growing list of other reputable organizations.
