The Sale of Puppies Online

This article originally appeared in The Fancy Speaks column in the February 10, 2012 issue of Dog News. It is reprinted here by permission of the author.

The Sale of Puppies Online

Carlotta Cooper

I read the January 20, 2012 DOG NEWS editorial “Regulating The Sale Of Puppies Online” with concern. Although it’s clear that the editorial is well-intentioned, it comes dangerously close to embracing the PUPS bill which is now in Congress. And PUPS, H.R. 835/S. 707, would be very harmful for hobby dog breeders.

The editorial argues that the Internet is used for the sale of dogs, which is true, and that some of these dogs come from places which have no policy or guidelines for their sale. Some even come from “the unregulated commercial breeder.” This is also probably true. The editorial goes on to ask, “Who is there to determine whether or not the seller is responsible? Who establishes the policy to protect the dog in these situations whether or not it is a commercial or homebred sale?”

I would like to point out that people have been selling dogs by means of newspaper classified ads, magazine ads, billboard notices, and other forms of commerce and advertising for generations. No one has been regulating these retail sales directly to the public. The thinking has always been that the buyer needs to be careful when buying anything, from anyone. Caveat emptor has a very real meaning when it comes to buying a pet. The buyer should exercise due caution when buying a puppy or dog, whether they are buying from a magazine, newspaper, or over the Internet. It is not the responsibility of the government to regulate the sale of puppies for the buyer. It is up to the buyer to use some good judgment when making a purchase. This hasn’t changed since people were buying puppies from ads in dog magazines in the 1980s, or buying dogs at any other time in history.

Large commercial breeders who are inspected by the USDA are already regulated and they do report their wholesale sales. However, the retail sale of puppies and dogs directly to individual buyers has never been regulated at the federal level. In many states this kind of sale is now regulated at the state level, if you sell more than x number of puppies per year. In some states it is covered under a sales and use tax, the same kind of tax that covers the sale of Girl Scout Cookies or having a yard sale. If you sell more than a certain number of puppies per year in some states you would be required to get a business and/or kennel license so you could regularly report your tax income from sales.

HSUS calls the fact that retail sales to individuals are not regulated at the federal level a “loophole” and, in PUPS, they are trying to change this situation. But this exemption of retail sales for small breeders is not a loophole. It is the way the law was intended to work. In DDAL vs. Veneman (2003), the case in which the Doris Day Animal League sued the USDA to try to make them inspect retail breeders (home, hobby, show breeders), the judge gave a clear ruling that small breeders were not the same as pet stores and did not have to be regulated or inspected as such. HSUS has been trying to change the law through PAWS and PUPS ever since that time.

These small hobby breeders and others who sell puppies and dogs by retail means were not meant to be regulated in the same manner as large commercial breeders. But that’s what PUPS would do.

It is up to the buyer, not to the government, to check out the person who sells a puppy. Otherwise, all of us who breed dogs are going to have the USDA visiting our homes to see how we keep and raise our puppies.

Now, it’s true, as the editorial mentions, that many people don’t like the idea of “regulation,” but in this case regulation cuts right to the core of everyone who breeds and shows dogs. If PUPS becomes law it would cripple breeders who show, breed dogs for performance, and who breed quality companion dogs. We would be required to meet the same USDA standards that are in place for large commercial breeders, even though we raise puppies in our homes. Most of us could not do this and the result would be the end of countless serious breeding programs in the show world, along with the end of precious bloodlines and, in some cases, the end of breeds.

The AKC sees this, too. On January 26, 2012 they sent a letter (AKC Opposition to H.R. 835/S. 707 the PUPS Act (PDF) January 2012) to members of Congress from Dennis Sprung with their concerns about PUPS. Among other things it says:

“The AKC does not oppose the concept of regulating high volume breeder retailers but we believe that the definitions proposed in this bill are misleading, overly broad, and potentially damaging to responsible breeders who individually maintain and breed only a few dogs in their homes.

“Although PUPS was designed to regulate internet sales of puppies, it would require anyone who owns or co-owns even a few female dogs that produce 50 or more puppies offered for sale in a year to be regulated under existing USDA dog "dealer" regulations. These regulations are designed for high-volume commercial kennels that produce puppies for wholesale, and require a USDA commercial license, maintenance of specified commercial kennel engineering standards and regular inspections. They are not appropriate for small breeders who may keep only a few dogs in their homes.”

In short, AKC opposes PUPS as it is written and asked members of Congress to withhold their support.

As it is written, PUPS would also regulate anyone who sells these puppies by any means, not just over the Internet. It specifically includes anyone who “sells or offers for sale, via any means of conveyance (including the Internet, telephone, or newspaper),” so it does not just intend to regulate people who sell over the Internet.

I doubt I have to mention how many show breeders have web sites or sell puppies online. You would also fall under this bill for Internet regulation of puppy sales.

PUPS is a very dangerous bill that will harm all of us who breed and show dogs. If you haven’t contacted your legislators to ask them to withhold support for PUPS, you can contact them by visiting this site: http://www.contactingthecongress.org/

Here is some more information about PUPS. Talking points from Sportsmen's and Animal Owners' Voting Alliance (SAOVA):

WHAT PUPS DOES:

• Abandons traditional determination between wholesale and retail---so that USDA can regulate home/hobby breeders who don't sell to pet stores.

• Begins USDA regulation of anyone (with 1 intact female dog over 4 months of age) who sells, places, or adopts out more than 50 dogs in a year ... to start. Could easily be amended down to 10 ... to 2.

• Takes away your right to privacy in your own home. USDA or their contractors can without notice enter your home and inspect it if they SUSPECT you might meet criteria for regulation.

• Over-regulates responsible home breeders out of existence. Mandates non-porous floors, kennel sizes, floor drains, and pages of requirements impossible for most home breeders to follow.

• Forces shelters, and home/hobby breeders to redesign their current facilities in order to meet federal standards.

• Establishes government controlled exercise standards that are not scientifically proven.

• Sets precedent with exercise standards for future rigid socialization and breeding standards that would remove owner’s flexibility to use professional judgment based on breed and purpose.

• Reduces the ability of the American public to obtain healthy privately bred or rescue dogs of their choosing.

• Places an unfunded mandate on Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) and overextends their enforcement ability.

• Fails to exempt sportsmen, sporting dog trainers, and hunting clubs from being regulated alongside in-home sellers.

• Adds more federal oversight and regulation into Americans’ daily lives.

HSUS Gets It Wrong

This article first appeared in the May 7, 2010 issue of Dog News magazine and is reprinted here by permission of the author.

HSUS Gets It Wrong

Carlotta Cooper

The following piece was written for individuals, kennel clubs and state dog/animal federations to use when contacting legislators, especially following Humane Society of the United States Lobby Day visits. These visits can leave your legislators with the impression that HSUS speaks for all animal lovers and that they are experts on animal care. Nothing could be farther from the truth! A look at the HSUS web site reveals many ways in which their hands-on knowledge of animals is very lacking.

Here are some ways that the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) “gets it wrong” about animals:

Dog/pet breeding. For anyone who knows the slightest thing about breeding animals, it’s almost laughable to visit the HSUS web site.

Dogs do not have “breeding partners.” They’re dogs not people.

Dogs do not need to be “forced” to breed, as HSUS claims on their site when they write about “puppy mills” or commercial dog breeders. In fact, most dogs have to be restrained from breeding whenever a female is in season. Female dogs are ready and willing to breed whenever their hormones tell them they’re ready.

Every single time HSUS “assists” with an animal seizure, it’s the “worst case” they’ve ever seen. The animals are ALWAYS living in deplorable conditions. And, every state where they try to pass a bill is the “worst state” for animal cruelty, “puppy mills,” or whatever else they are trying to pass. Every state is a "puppy mill" capital! HSUS used this phrase at least a dozen times in 2009 to refer to different states.

HSUS even told the Tennessee Senate about a breeder’s dog with a dissolving jaw, blaming it on being over-bred — yet such a condition had nothing to do with breeding. Instead, loss of teeth and the loss of jaw is a condition that can occur in many Toy breeds of dogs, as well as other breeds that are prone to teeth problems.

And, contrary to those population figures HSUS is so fond of quoting (“one cat can produce a gazillion kittens; one dog can produce a trillion puppies”), the fact of the matter is that, according to research, relatively few of the kittens and puppies produced by stray animals actually live to maturity to reproduce. http://www.ncraoa.com/myths.html

Oh, and Wayne Pacelle, president and CEO of HSUS, the man who stars in those sad commercials on TV with the pitiful animals asking you for your money? He had this to say about his feelings for animals:

“I don’t have a hands-on fondness for animals…To this day I don’t feel bonded to any non-human animal. I like them and I pet them and I’m kind to them, but there’s no special bond between me and other animals.” Wayne Pacelle quoted in Bloodties: Nature, Culture and the Hunt, by Ted Kerasote.

Spaying and neutering. Spaying and neutering pets is a veterinary medical decision that should not be made by the government. Instead, this decision should always be made by an owner who is fully informed of the pros and cons. Dogs who are spayed or neutered are more likely to suffer from many kinds of cancer and they are more likely to develop orthopedic problems such as hip dysplasia and cruciate ruptures, especially when they are spayed or neutered at a very young age. Spaying and neutering is most often done for the convenience of the owner. It does NOT cause pets to be more affectionate or less aggressive. In fact, according to research, spayed female dogs are more likely to become aggressive. Removing a female dog's ovaries can lead to them having shortened lives. An ovario-hysterectomy is a serious operation for a dog, just as it is for a human woman, and it should not be chosen lightly.

Even HSUS admits that some 75 percent of dogs in the U.S. are already spayed and neutered and 87 percent of owned cats are spayed and neutered. There is no reason or need to spay and neuter any animals that are needed to be used for intentional breeding. In fact, we need intentionally bred dogs to act as seeing eye dogs, hunting dogs, service and assistance dogs, show dogs, herding dogs and to fill many other special roles with their humans.

Spaying and neutering animals is a personal choice and it should remain so. Spaying and neutering all animals will not stop animals from ending up in animal shelters. Better enforcement of existing leash laws are necessary, as well as offering low-cost spay/neuter services to people who want to alter their pets. Education is the key. Mandatory spay/neuter laws (MSN), such as those backed by HSUS, do not work.

HSUS is one of the few organizations that still promotes mandatory spay/neuter laws. These laws have failed everywhere they have been tried in the United States. The American Veterinary Medical Association and even the ASPCA now oppose mandatory spay/neuter laws (MSN), as do practically every other animal organization. Yet HSUS has not disavowed this failed approach which punishes responsible animal owners. They still believe that the way to reduce shelter populations is to spay and neuter the cats and dogs of responsible pet owners who are kept safely at home instead of offering low cost spay/neuter to people who would like to have their pets altered. Instead of focusing on containment issues, they want to use surgery to force people to spay and neuter their pets. Instead of trying to increase adoptions, they want to use strong-arm tactics. And, instead of looking at the reasons why people surrender their pets, they want to charge people with intact pets higher fees. HSUS’s approach on mandatory spay/neutering is archaic, at best, and totally out of step with leaders in this area.

Breed-Specific Legislation. The Humane Society of the United States has one of the worst records imaginable when it comes to breed specific legislation — legislation that targets specific breeds of dogs. They have repeatedly shown themselves to be intent on killing “pit bulls,” even as young as newborn puppies (North Carolina). In the Michael Vick case they raised money to care for the dogs taken from Mr. Vick’s premises while telling The New York Times that the dogs should be killed on the grounds that they could not be rehabilitated. Of course, as we soon discovered, the dogs were never actually in the care of the HSUS, so they were raising money under false pretenses. Plus, virtually all of the dogs were rehabilitated by others and are now leading happy lives. Shame on HSUS!

HSUS seeks to encourage breed specific legislation in every city and state where they have the chance, often using higher licensing fees for Bully breed dogs and other so-called “dangerous dogs” for no good reason. Or, trying to pass mandatory spay and neuter laws for these breeds as a way to reduce their population. This is a form of discrimination.

Horse welfare. For people who cannot keep their horses in the current economy HSUS recommends that they donate them to riding schools and police departments — places which have to be extremely selective about the horses they accept. Just how many riding schools and police departments with horse units does HSUS think this country has?

If that doesn’t work, HSUS tells people to donate their horses to “sanctuaries.” Unfortunately, these refuges for unwanted horses are already filled to overflowing. So, as a last resort, HSUS tells people to consider euthanizing their unwanted horses. But, they don’t tell you what to do with your dead horse. Because it’s rather expensive to euthanize a horse and it’s even more expensive to dispose of the body. Most people don’t have a place to bury a horse, especially if they board their horse at a stable.

The wrong focus in dogfighting. Most people can agree that dogfighting is a bloody and disagreeable sport. Yet HSUS has managed to stigmatize people who love these dogs, including people who rescue them. They talk about recognizing the “signs” of dogfighting as though simply having a pit bull and a treadmill in your home makes you a dogfighter! Many people exercise their dogs using treadmills. They’re very popular with dog show people to keep their dogs in good physical condition. Many people with dogs use springpoles so their dogs can get more exercise by leaping after a toy or something fun on the end of the pole set just out of reach. It’s very entertaining for a dog. But, according to HSUS, this is another sign that you’re a dogfighter. Breaking sticks, used to stop a dog fight, are considered another sign that you’re a dogfighter. The truth is that if you keep more than one dog, especially a large breed of dog, it’s possible that your dogs may fight or squabble on their own. Some people may choose to break up a fight with a breaking stick. It doesn’t mean that they are operating a dogfighting ring.

This is another instance where HSUS shows that it does not understand (or deliberately misunderstands) animal husbandry.

And, then there is the infamous “rape stand” used by so-called dogfighters. Ordinary (non-HSUS) people call these breeding stands. According to HSUS these stands are used so female dogs can be “raped” by male dogs for breeding. But, as already mentioned, breeding does not happen between dogs until the female says so. It’s a matter of hormones and timing. A breeding stand holds the female steady and in a good position to make it easy for the male since they will stay together for some time after the act. It makes things more comfortable and keeps the dogs from accidentally injuring each other by turning or getting twisted while they’re still connected. That’s all it does. There is no “rape.” And these stands are used by people who are not dogfighters. Even people with the gentlest dogs may use a breeding stand to help their dogs reach each other at a good angle.

Attacks on so-called "factory farming. HSUS relentlessly attacks what they call “factory farming.” Yet most farms in the U.S. are family-owned. What HSUS characterizes as “factory farms” are simply farms that use modern methods of farming. Besides raising the cost of production (and the cost of animal products at the grocery store), the "humane" methods that HSUS advocates often result in increased mortality, increased injuries, and decreased overall health of the animals themselves. Many people wouldn't be able to afford to buy these products at the grocery store. Most people don’t realize that HSUS promotes a vegan lifestyle and would actually like to see an end to animal agriculture. That is one of the real reasons behind these attacks on modern agriculture. They don’t actually care if people can afford to buy bacon or beef products. Please keep this in mind the next time you hear HSUS attack “factory farming.”

These are just a few of the ways that HSUS “gets it wrong.” If you look at their web site there are many other ways. They may seem like an organization that’s friendly to animals but they’re not. In many cases they don’t actually know anything about the animals they talk about. They really don’t know about animals and yet they are in our legislature, talking to lawmakers, trying to tell you how to pass laws.

Please think twice before listening to HSUS.

Thank you.