
(Beth Clifton photo)
Pit bull-pushing legislation in Arizona undoes ban on selling puppy mill pups
PHOENIX, Arizona––Losing six spring 2016 attempts to ban at the state level breed-specific local ordinances meant to protect the public and other pets from pit bull attacks, the Best Friends Animal Society on May 19, 2016 won a ban on breed-specific legislation in Arizona through a back door alliance with lobbyists for the Pet Industry Joint Advisory Council, the American Kennel Club, the United Kennel Club, and other fronts for dog breeders.
Stealth passage
Before the stealth passage of the Arizona ban, attempts to prohibit breed-specific ordinances had been defeated in Georgia, Idaho, Kentucky, Missouri, Washington, and West Virginia.
Crowed Best Friends senior legislative attorney Ledy Van Kavage via Facebook, “Arizona becomes the 20th state to outlaw breed discrimination by cities!”
Van Kavage did not mention that the Arizona bill “to outlaw breed discrimination” passed as part of a bill to repeal ordinances that prevent pet stores from selling dogs bred at puppy mills.

Polo, the recently rehomed pit bull who on April 21, 2016 killed three-day-old Sebastian Caban. (SDHS & SPCA and San Diego County Animal Services photos)
State leaders in fatal attacks
Neither did Van Kavage mention that the states whose legislatures enacted bans on breed-specific ordinances in years before there was organized opposition from pit bull attack victims include Texas, California, and Florida, one of which has led or tied for the lead in fatal dog attacks in each of the past 11 years.
Neither did Van Kavage acknowledge that the ability to regulate dangerous dogs by breed was barely if ever raised during months of publicity and media discussion pertaining to the Arizona bill, SB 1248, which was the last bill passed during the 2016 Arizona legislative session to be endorsed into law by Governor Doug Ducey.

Puppies in shredded paper.
(Flickr photo)
Pet stores & dealers
The focal aspect of SB 1248, emphasized in public discussion, was the clause providing that “A pet store or pet dealer may not obtain a dog or cat for resale or sell or offer for sale any dog or cat obtained from a person who is required to be licensed by the pet dealer regulations of the U.S. Department of Agriculture.”
Not raised for discussion and debate were clauses amending the jurisdiction of Arizona animal control ordinances to state that “A city of town may regulate the control of dogs if the regulation is not specific to any breed,” and that a county board of supervisors may “contract with any city or town to enforce the provisions of any ordinance enacted by such city or town for the control of dogs if the provisions are not specific to breed.”

Trooper & Sarah. (Beth Clifton)
Repealed ordinances to help shelters
Ironically, SB 1248 repealed two existing ordinances which were passed in part to help animal shelters and rescues more easily rehome pit bulls, who make up more than a third of shelter dog intake, but are adopted at less than half the rate of intake, and are the dogs of choice for under 5% of people acquiring a dog.
Also ironically, the Arizona ordinances that SB 1248 repealed much resembled an ordinance pushed into effect in October 2015 in Salt Lake County, Utah, Best Friends’ home state, “at the behest of county council member Arlyn Bradshaw, now executive director of Best Friends Animal Society Utah,” reported Mike Gorrell of the Salt Lake Tribune.

Longtime Humane Society of the U.S. regional representative Dave Pauli has participated in many puppy mill rescues.
(Facebook photo)
HSUS flip-flopped
SB 1248 will “immediately overturn existing ordinances in Tempe and Phoenix that allow pet shops to sell only rescue and shelter animals. And it would stall efforts to adopt a similar ordinance in Tucson,” explained Howard Fischer of Capitol Media Services.
“Efforts to block it, though, lost steam,” Fischer recounted, “when the Humane Society of the United States, which had initially blasted the measure, agreed not to oppose it.”

Clockwise: Best Friends Animal Society president Gregory Castle, HSUS president Wayne Pacelle, and ASPCA president Matthew Bershadker.
Pacelle praised similar ordinances
The mid-April 2016 HSUS flip-flop came in the same week that HSUS president Wayne Pacelle blogged his endorsement of ordinances similar to those now repealed in Tempe and Phoenix.
Wrote Pacelle in “Wayne’s blog” of April 22, 2016, “In the latest blow against the scourge of puppy mills, Philadelphia, the nation’s fifth largest city, this morning banned all sales of puppy mill dogs in pet stores and at outdoor venues like flea markets.

(Beth Clifton photo)
City of Brotherly Love
“With today’s action,” Pacelle proclaimed, “the City of Brotherly Love joins more than 140 other localities around the United States,” including Boston, Chicago, Los Angeles, and San Diego, as well as Toronto, Ontario, Canada, “with similar ordinances restricting puppy mill sales.
“Together,” Pacelle asserted, “these developments are driving the market toward shelter and rescue adoption and responsible breeders.”

(Flickr photo)
Dubious results
Reality, however, is that total shelter adoptions have plateaued since 1981, at circa 2.5 million dogs per year, while the breeder share of the dog acquisition market has doubled, from 26% to 54%, with little hint that “responsible breeders” have taken any market share from the rapidly expanding commercial breeding industry.
Preventing pet stores from selling dogs obtained from breeders appears to have only accelerated the trend, already building for about 25 years, of breeders selling dogs directly to the public through web sites and social media––and has accelerated a parallel trend of “rescuers” purchasing puppies from puppy mills for resale.
(See “Why we cannot adopt our way out of shelter killing.”)

(Flickr photo)
Driving market to online sellers
People who want dogs other than the pit bulls and Chihuahuas who together have made up nearly half of U.S. shelter intakes in recent years are driven, when pet stores have no puppies, to patronize either unlicensed backyard breeders, or breeders who sell through electronic media.
This does little to improve puppy mill conditions, since backyard breeders and breeders who do not sell through conventional retail stores are the most difficult to keep under surveillance through inspection, the most difficult to regulate, and also very often those most implicated in large-scale neglect cases.

(Flickr photo)
How Arizona bill was passed
The Pet Industry Joint Advisory Council and other entities representing breeder interests promoted SB 1248 as a bill which would protect the ability of people acquiring dogs to acquire dogs of their preferred breeds.
SB 1248 was “driven largely by complaints by Frank Minoe,” wrote Fischer, “who filed suit after Phoenix adopted its ordinance, which affected his Puppies ‘N Love store. He charged in federal court that the local law interfered with interstate commerce, noting that most of the commercial breeders are located in Missouri.
“U.S. District Court Judge David Campbell rejected that contention. So, aside from filing an appeal, Minoe took his complaint to the legislature.”

(Beth Clifton photo)
HSUS had heralded “landmark victory”
The Humane Society of the U.S. celebrated Campbell’s July 2015 ruling as “a landmark victory for the animal rights world and a blow to the pet industry,” noted Phoenix New Times reporter Miriam Wasser, before HSUS flip-flopped and worked to overturn it.
Within the past two years judges in Florida, Illinois, and Rhode Island have also upheld community ordinances prohibiting the sale of commercially bred dogs.
But the verdicts do not appear to have caused more pet stores to follow the practices of Petco, which has offered only shelter animals for acquisition at company stores since 1969, and PetSmart, doing likewise since 1987.

(Flickr photo)
Pet stores folding
Rather, independent pet stores are often closing, rather than stock shelter animals the owners deem potentially dangerous to customers and their families, or just unprofitable to keep in stores for weeks or months until someone shows interest in acquiring them.
After the January 2016 Florida verdict, for example, Palm Beach Puppies North closed within 24 hours, reported Palm Beach Post staff writer Alexandra Clough.
Carlsbad Pets, of Carlsbad, California, in May 2016 also closed within 24 hours, following passage of a ban on selling commercially bred dogs.
Both Palm Beach Puppies and Carlsbad Pets had been the only stores in their communities to sell purebred pups.

(Flickr photo)
New York & Ohio
Legislation parallel to Arizona AB 1248 may be forthcoming in New York and Ohio.
In New York, early in 2016, the towns of Mamaroneck and Mount Pleasant made sales of commercially bred dogs and cats punishable by fines escalating from $250 for a first offense to $1,000 for repeated offenses.
In Grove City, Ohio, the Petland chain has filed a lawsuit seeking to overturn a March 2016 ordinance against selling dogs and cats other than those “from animal shelters, humane societies, and rescue groups. It takes effect on January 1, 2017,” reported Jim Siegel of the Columbus Dispatch.
Meanwhile, Siegel added, “The [Ohio] Senate Ways and Means Committee [in early May] put an amendment into an unrelated state tax cleanup bill that would trump attempts by Grove City and others, like Toledo, to regulate pet stores.
The Ohio bill, HB 166, appears to be still pending.
Symbolism
The first community ban on selling commercially bred dogs and cats appears to have been adopted by West Hollywood, California, in February 2010. But it was strictly symbolic, since West Hollywood at the time had no stores selling dogs and cats at all.
Very disheartening. I would like to hear the rationale for this. Have pitbulls truly become so important to the members of these organizations pushing for this legislation that they would condone the overturning of such important legislation advancing the adoptions of shelter animals? If so, I’m sure I’m not alone in believing that some changes are needed immediately in those organizations.
Let’s face it, the majority of the public doesn’t want the dogs shelters have: mostly pit bulls. I’ll bet ol’ Ledy and Pa-shill-e decided it’s better to side with PIJAC and get their way on anti-BSL, since they can’t pawn off their damaged goods through pet stores anyway.
There are breeder lobbyists that now work on policy at Best Friends.
The AKC makes most of its money from puppy mill registrations, primarily through pet stores like Petland.
This was all about helping the AKC keep making money from puppy mills, and enabling puppy mills to keep having outlets to sell.
How long will it take until people understand that breeding interests moved into the management of Best friends Animal Society? I am talking about literally, people who are breeder lobbyists that work on policy for Best Friends
As for the relationship between pet stores, puppy mills, and the AKC, the AKC has long had relationships with puppy mill-selling chains like Petland, through both registrations and a microchip program. The AKC would go broke without its puppy mill or commercial breeder registration money, and they lobby with the puppy mill industry groups.
So thanks to Best Friends and HSUS, puppy mills can be helped to keep running strong and the AKC can keep making the money off the puppy mills that literally is their lifeblood.
Anyone who loves animals should be very very angry at Best Friends and HSUS. If you donate and don’t approve, let them know, or they’ll keep throwing puppy mill puppies under the bus.
West Hollywood did have a pet shop, Elite Animals, which had sold a puppy to Arnold Schwarzenegger. His puppy came from a Minnesota-based USDA licensed puppy mill CAPS had investigated. Council members came to one of our Elite Animal protests and decided to work with us on the ordinance.
Subsequent to West Hollywood, we generated ordinances in Glendale (this pet shop is still selling rabbits, so we recently contacted the city council; one member will be proposing an amendment), Los Angeles and San Diego. We are working on more ordinances in SoCal, having investigated every pet shop there. Los Angeles did not initially enforce its ordinance, so we had to investigate the pet shops still selling dogs, cats and rabbits and turn this evidence over to the city attorney.
However, West Hollywood was not the first municipality to have a retail ban ordinance. That honor goes to Albuquerque, NM, which received little to no publicity on this victory in 2006. West Hollywood, because it is well-known, received worldwide publicity and is thus the genesis for the ordinance movement. We got emails and calls from all over the U.S. and Canada. We assisted with the first Canadian ordinance in Richmond, B.C., which led to Toronto passing its law.
http://www.ibtimes.com/new-regulations-imposed-internet-pet-sales-usda-cracks-down-puppy-mills-1404197
See also Friends of Animals Action Line Winter 2015 – 16, “How Much is that Shelter Doggie in the Window?”
While Internet sales are increasing, the number of pet shops is decreasing. The number of USDA-licensed facilities has decreased since ordinances started passing. Tougher laws in Missouri have also led to puppy mill closures.
The number of USDA-licensed dog breeders is of much less significance in terms of preventing animal suffering than the cumulative numbers of puppies produced for sale. Fewer but larger breeding operations means easier inspections, but the transition from selling puppies in stores to selling them online has eliminated most of the opportunity to maintain surveillance of the puppy supply business after puppies leave the breeding facility. In effect, the puppy-breeding industry is moving toward what is called “just-in-time” delivery in retail, with puppies moving more rapidly from breeders to homes. Eliminating pet stores as intermediaries is reducing the numbers of possible points of neglect, infection, and abuse. This is not to be confused, however, with actually reducing the size of the puppy-breeding industry, which is now much larger than it ever was before.
Visit http://www.pupquest.org to learn how to be puppy source savvy. NONE of us working to shut down the retail pet industry want to promote breeders but not to admit that there is a vast difference in animal care between a reputable, educated breeder and a puppy farm is naive.
As a veterinarian in private practice for over 15 years I see folks daily who insisted on buying a pup and NOT adopting. Boggles my mind but that is what they did. Here’s the kicker….”humane, animal welfare/rights/protection folks won’t guide them to a reputable breeder they would rather accuse them of not adopting and being responsible for all the dead shelter dogs. That just alienates them and then they get their info about breeders from the “bad guys”. That is why we created PupQuest.
If you like it, please share it, if you think we are “purebred puppy pushers” as one animal rights activist called us, don’t!! All I know is that I have been working to shut down the retail pet industry since the early 80’s and Internet sales have only made things worse……….
Would love to hear some feedback on PupQuest.org
Unfortunately “reputable educated” breeders are also pumping out genetically flawed,, disturbed dogs that end up in shelters. Yes, breeders of tilted champions- a meaningless and empty thing.
The “reputable educated breeders” also lobby like banshees through their kennel clubs, AKC Legislative activity, and front groups like NAIA to oppose or weaken anti-puppy mill laws and prop up the industry. They don’t display that to the public, an ugly secret.
Self-professed “educated, responsible breeders” are a big part of the problem, and until they show some real responsible & educated activity, rather than the usual veil of doublespeak, sorry, not buying
The type of folks you are referring to are indeed a HUGE part of the problem! They are not reputable.
Did you look at PupQuest.org? Did you see what health screenings, etc. we tell people to look for? I am a veterinarian and the genetically flawed dogs (putting it nicely) that some breeders produce is one of the reasons we created PupQuest. Yes, the dog show industry is part of the problem. Yes, the judges pin genetic mutants. But the fact remains that most people buy pups from breeders. If we can steer them away from the worst it is at least doing something.
It is a disgrace that many breeders fight regs on breeders….we wouldn’t consider them reputable. Slippery slope and all!
The USDA did finally acknowledge they have regulatory jurisdiction over online dealers, but haven’t moved to actually do anything about it, thanks in part to pressure from the agriculture industry and its allies like AKC, the premier puppy mill registrar.