Puppy mills. Two words that evoke images of horrible living conditions and provoke strong emotions. Unfortunately, lawmakers, including some in Dallas, have been misled to equate them with licensed, inspected breeders rather than the illegal, substandard operations the term rightly describes.
Lawmakers have been ill-advised that a ban on retail pet store sales will eliminate these subversive operations. Despite good intentions, these bans are not the solution. They are an emotional overreaction to a complex problem.
The animal welfare community has spent decades promoting false narratives about commercial dog breeders and their relationships with retail pet stores. I should know. I believed these same accusations for over 40 years. Throughout my career, I wholly supported the anti-pet store campaigns. Finally, someone asked me if I had ever visited a USDA-licensed commercial breeder.
The truth was that I had not.
I have now had the opportunity to meet with dozens of licensed breeders. I have met hardworking, knowledgeable professionals who share the same love and dedication for the well-being of animals as I do. They have state-of-the-art facilities with consulting veterinarians, spacious kennels, exercise yards and compassionate personnel. They are the exact opposite of what decades of erroneous allegations have made them out to be.
Eight years ago, the Humane Society of the United States launched the retail ban concept now being proposed for Dallas. However, bans haven’t put puppy mills out of business. Why? Retail bans take the misguided approach of targeting the smallest and most regulated source of getting puppies: retail stores. Only 4% of puppies in the U.S. are actually acquired from pet stores, according to the American Pet Products Association Pet Owner Survey. That means 96% are acquired from other sources.
You can’t eliminate puppy mills by targeting the smallest source of puppies in the least likely environment to be connected with puppy mills. After 40 years advocating for the adoption of dogs, adoption is always my first choice. But adoption is not always the right fit for everyone, and those families should have safe and responsible choices.
If Dallas bans the retail sale of puppies, very few stores will be affected. By my count, only one store in Dallas might be forced to close, the Petland franchise at Preston Road and Forest Lane because, according to franchise owner Jay Suk, 80% of the store’s sales are puppies.
The franchise is owned by a man who has put 13 years of his life into the business and employs 30 people who will lose their jobs if it closes. He purchases his puppies from top USDA-licensed and -inspected breeders and from small hobby breeders. He views inspection reports and conducts on-site visits to ensure that he is acquiring only from the finest breeders.
Retail pet stores such as Petland must also adhere to state and local animal welfare laws as well as consumer protection laws.
If we have any chance of eliminating puppy mills, then animal welfare organizations, USDA-licensed breeders and retail pet stores must work together.
Retail bans haven’t put puppy mills out of business. Instead, the bans tend to push demand for puppies into the abyss of the unknown and unregulated. Instead of passing a ban on retail sales, Dallas could consider breeder and retail regulations such as those that have been passed by the state of Ohio and have worked well there for several years.
We need standards that provide for the safety of animals, give consumers the choices they deserve and support the growth of responsible business. We do not need to make grand gestures like banning the retail sale of puppies, which accomplishes nothing.
Ed Sayres is executive director of Petland Charities. He wrote this column for The Dallas Morning News.
Find the full opinion section here. Got an opinion about this issue? Send a letter to the editor and you just might get published.