A Word About Puppy Mills: Provided by HSUS

Cruelty Laws – Why It Isn't Easier to Stop This Abuse of Dogs

Some local humane societies and governmental agencies investigate conditions at puppy mills and intervene to rescue the animals if necessary. In many cases, though, it's not clear whether the local shelter has legal authority to step in; even when employees are empowered to investigate, the sheer magnitude of the problem may significantly exceed the organization's human, physical, and financial resources.

Shelters that have been able to intervene on the animals' behalf suddenly find themselves with a large number of animals in need of immediate veterinary care. Additionally, the shelter will be responsible for housing the dogs throughout what can often be a lengthy legal process. The cost for veterinary care and basic food and housing can run into the tens of thousands of dollars within weeks of seizing as few as 50 dogs from a poorly run facility.

Most shelters consider protecting these vulnerable animals part of their mission and are generally eager to try and remove animals from such poor conditions. It is important to remember though, that "regular" shelter operations do not stop when a raid is conducted. The shelter will still need to be open to the public and will still need to provide care and housing for the normal number of animals being brought to it by the community. Of course, if a shelter is able to enter an inhumane breeding operation and remove dogs, financial and community support during the aftermath is essential to ensuring the animals receive the help they need.

Legislation is key to ensuring lasting change for animals. But just passing a law to ban puppy mills—an idea that's often proposed—isn't that easy. Anyone who has worked on legislation—even on something as basic as stopping abuse—can tell you that bringing a bill from an idea into a law is a long and difficult process. While we have had made some strides in improving animal care standards over the last two decades, there is still a significant amount of work to be done to ensure basic humane treatment of dogs and puppies in breeding facilities.

In 2002, The HSUS sought to pass the Puppy Protection Act in both the House and the Senate. Designed to help the USDA enforce the AWA, this legislation included a proposed "three strikes" policy that would have given the agency the power to revoke the licenses of puppy mill operators who commit repeated serious violations. The policy proposed putting modest limits on excessive overbreeding (prohibiting breeders from breeding females every time they're in heat or before they reach the age of one). It also included a requirement that dogs and puppies in puppy mills be adequately socialized, enhancing their well-being and improving their chances for adapting successfully to life as a family pet.

Sadly, though, some purebred dog registry Kennel Clubs (which often receive registration fees from puppy mills) and other animal-use industry groups lobbied heavily against these provisions. They also initiated an active campaign to once again confuse small breeders into thinking that such legislation would apply to them—and even went so far as to claim they would be forced to keep their dogs in unacceptable conditions and cages. Misrepresenting the benefits of the legislation, these protectors of the big-money puppy mill industry worked hard to prevent these modest improvements from being signed into law.