legislation > q & a

Animal Folks MN is part of a large coalition of animal welfare organizations, veterinarians and community members that have been working to ensure the health and safety of dogs and cats in Minnesota.

As no state laws exist to license and inspect commercial dog and cat breeding operations, we urge you to educate your state legislators and others in your community about the need to license and regulate dog and cat breeders. 

STATUS: Senate File (S.F.) 462 and House File (H.F.) 702, known as the Dog and Cat Regulation Bill, were the bills introduced in 2011 for the 2011-2012 Minnesota Legislative Session to license and regulate commercial dog and cat breeders in Minnesota. The session ended (adjournment sine die) on May 10, 2012 and neither bills were granted hearings. The bills did not progress and were not voted on.

A new bill to license and regulate dog and cat breeders will be introduced in 2013.

To better understand past legislation and the legislative process, below are questions and answers regarding S.F. 462/H.F. 702. 

1. What was the bill called?

The Dog and Cat Breeder Regulation Bill. But a bill is often referred to by its numbers, as that is how bills are filed at the Minnesota Legislature. The bill in the MN Senate was Senate File (S.F.) 462. The bill in the MN House of Representatives was House File (H.F.) 702. These bills were introduced at the State; these are not federal bills. Once a bill passes (approved by the Minnesota Legislature) and the Governor signs it, then it becomes "law."

2. Who were the authors?

The Chief Author in the MN Senate for S.F. 462 was Senator Barb Goodwin. The Chief Author in the MN House for H.F. 702 was Representative John Lesch. Every bill can also have co-authors, who sign on and show their support. In the MN Senate, a bill can have up to 4 co-authors; in the MN House, a bill can have up to 34 co-authors. Co-authors can sign on to multiple bills.

3. Were the House and Senate bills the same?

S.F. 462 and H.F. 702 were companion bills. This means, when first introduced, the bill language for each is identical. As the bills move through the process, the language for each may change through amendments — depending on what Senators or Representatives want. For more information on process, go to: How A Bill Becomes Law.

4. Where can I find the actual bill language to read it?

The Senate bill can be found at the MN Senate website: S.F. 462

The House bill can be found at the MN House website: H.F. 702

These links are also posted on Animal Folks MN: Legislation

5. What is the problem this bill was trying to solve?

The problem is inhumane dog and cat breeding practices and conditions in Minnesota by unscrupulous or negligent breeders, and a lack of oversight of this industry. This problem is not limited to large-scale breeding facilities only; the problem of inhumane breeding practices and conditions has been documented in facilities of all sizes.

6. What is meant by "inhumane breeding practices and conditions"?

There is a wide spectrum of business practices in the breeding and selling of dogs and cats in Minnesota. A certain type of breeder (referred to as puppy or kitten mills, backyard breeders, basement breeders or junk breeders) are in the "business" of breeding to make money. For these type of breeders (high-volume or low-volume), corners are cut in operations so as to maximize profits, resulting in substandard or deplorable conditions. Examples:

• Adult dogs and cats live their entire lives in small, overcrowded cages and are bred repeatedly.

• Cages are often stacked, allowing feces and urine to fall onto the animals below.

• Animals may be malnourished from inadequate food and water, receive little or no veterinary care, are stressed from constant confinement and neglect, have fleas, worms, etc.

• Many animals have deformed paws, are severely matted, have rotted teeth or are burned from sitting and standing in urine and feces.

• Animal are rarely, if at all, provided human interaction or socialization, resulting in behavioral problems (including fear, aggression and anxiety)

Animals produced by substandard breeders can be sick, diseased or may have genetic defects. These animals are then sold to the public. Both high-volume and low-volume breeders sell directly to consumers through classified or print ads, websites, parking lots or at the kennel/home. For additional insight, please review the pages on this website.

7. What was the goal of this bill?

To help ensure that dogs, cats, puppies and kittens are healthy and safe within breeding facilities in Minnesota by regulation of commercial dog and cat breeders.

8. What does "regulation" mean and why is it needed?

Licensing and regulation are the legal means to hold businesses accountable for their actions. For instance, hairdressers, liquor stores, restaurants, veterinarians and numerous other businesses in Minnesota must obtain a license to operate and be regulated (i.e., get inspected, adhere to standards, be fined if they break the law). Regulation raises the standards of an industry by weeding out the "bad" businesses. The buying, selling, breeding and dealing of dogs and cats in order to make money is business; these are commercial transactions. It differs from many other businesses in that the "product" is a living being and purchased as a pet.

9. So dog and cat breeders in Minnesota are not regulated?

Correct. Unlike other industries, the State of Minnesota does not require dog and cat breeders or dealers to obtain a license to operate. These businesses are not inspected by the State, nor are they required to follow any State standards of care. Due to this lack of oversight, animals are harmed. Consumers, too, are sold unhealthy dogs and cats, and communities (i.e., humane societies, law enforcement, animal control, etc.) are burdened with the responsibility of "dealing with" the problem.

10. Are humane societies in Minnesota regulated?

Yes. That's the double standard. Certain humane societies and rescue groups, defined under Minn. Stat. Sec. 347.31, are already licensed and inspected in Minnesota — and have been for years. Many humane societies and rescue groups in Minnesota receive sick, neglected and abused dogs and cats from disreputable breeding facilities, in addition to handling stray, abandoned or other unwanted animals.

NOTE: Minn. Stat. 347.31, Subd. 2 defines "kennel" as: Any place that obtains dogs or cats from municipalities, pounds or auctions; and/or advertises to receive lost, unwanted, stray, abandoned, or stolen dogs and cats.

11. Who would be regulated under S.F. 462 / H.F. 702?

A key aspect of any bill is the definition of "who" — i.e., who is required to obtain a license to operate and who will be regulated? S.F. 462 / H.F. 702 defined a commercial dog/cat breeder as: "a person, other than a hobby breeder, who possesses or has an ownership interest in animals and is engaged in the business of breeding animals for sale or for exchange in return for consideration, and who possesses ten or more adult intact animals and whose animals produce more than five total litters of puppies or kittens per year." Animals are defined as dogs and cats.

12. How was the "ten" number determined?

In past years, the breeder bill started licensing at 6 breeding animals. In 2010, however, the breeder licensing number was raised to 20 breeding animals as a compromise. (During that legislative session, another bill had been introduced that started licensing at 40 breeding animals; the licensing number was raised from 6 breeding animals to 20 as a compromise.) For the 2011-2012 legislative session, the coalition chose to lower the licensing number to 10 breeding animals based on research (below) and to protect more animals. Numerous people were consulted for their input, including Minnesota legislators, animal control, humane agents, law enforcement, veterinarians, humane societies, rescue groups, breeders and other experts and stakeholders. Other factors considered:

• The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) starts licensing of dog and cat breeders at 4 breeding females.

• Sherburne County, Stearns County and Mille Lacs County, three Minnesota counties with a breeder/kennel ordinance, each start licensing at 4 or more dogs over 6 months of age. (Stearns also includes "domestic pets and companion animals" in its definition.) Both Stearns County and Sherburne County cap a commercial kennel at no more than 40 dogs over six months of age; Mille Lacs County states "in no case shall the maximum number of adult dogs exceed 35".) Other Minnesota counties are debating similar ordinances because they do not want the fiscal responsibility of caring for hundreds of animals should a kennel prove to be irresponsible in its breeding practices and conditions.

• Iowa starts licensing at 4 or more breeding males and females. Wisconsin uses a slightly different definition, licensing breeders who sell 25 or more dogs each year (which amounts to about 4 breeding females).

• The majority of other states in the nation with breeder laws start licensing at 2 to 10 breeding animals.

• And, most importantly, animal cruelty cases reported to humane investigators, animal control and law enforcement indicate that cruelty and neglect among breeders occurs in all sizes of kennels (small, medium and large scale).

NOTE: The reason "adult intact animals" is used within definitions is because adult breeding animals (males + females) determine puppy and kitten production. One female could be bred twice a year with an average of 5 puppies/kittens per litter (varies by breed); this can determine the size of a kennel (number of estimated animals).

13. What were the key sections within S.F. 462/H.F. 702?

The key sections of the bill were framed as:

• Licensing — Require commercial dog and cat breeders in Minnesota to be licensed

• Inspections and Enforcement — Give legal authority to the MN Board of Animal Health to inspect commercial dog and cat breeding facilities and enforce State laws to ensure animal care standards are met

• Penalties — Impose civil, administrative and criminal penalties for those who violate the law

14. Was S.F. 462 / H.F. 702 different from previous bills?

S.F. 462 / H.F. 702 (for the 2012) had the same language as what was introduced in 2011. The bills used many of the points from the 2010 bill; however, specific improvements were made to reflect new research, information and input gathered. A few of the improvements within S.F. 462/H.F. 702 are noted below.

• Lower licensing number

As explained in questions #11 and #12 above, the licensing number in S.F. 462/H.F. 702 was "ten or more adult intact animals and whose animals produce more than five total litters of puppies or kittens per year." (See bill for full definition). Coalition members spoke with legislators who believed ten intact adult animals, while still a large business, was reasonable based on the well-documented problem of cruelty and neglect in kennels of varying sizes. This number was further supported by research of laws in other states and numerous conversations with those on the frontlines of animal welfare.

• Strengthen care standards based on scientific research/input

Considerable studies by respected veterinarians have been conducted in regards to dogs and cats in population settings and what is required to ensure animals are healthy — physically and psychologically. The Coalition incorporated some of this insight into S.F. 462/H.F. 702, such as:

— Veterinary plan - A provision was included in S.F. 462/H.F. 702 that requires breeders to have a veterinary care plan developed in conjuncion with a licensed veterinarian. This not only helps the animals but it provides guidance and support for the breeders.

— Animal well-being - S.F. 462/H.F. 702 contains language that requires adequate staff to observe each animal daily in order to monitor health, well-being and temperament.

• Strengthen fiscal options

As with previous bills, authority for inspections and enforcement was directed to the Board of Animal Health (BAH). In order to best utilize inspectors' time (and address breeders who are compliant), S.F. 462/H.F. 702:

— Inspections - Allows every other year inspections if a breeder has had two consecutive years of inspections with no violations.

— Reinspection fee - Allows the BAH to charge a reinspection fee if they have to continue to return (multiple visits in one year) to a facility that is out of compliance with state law.

 

15. I heard there were multiple breeder bills. Is that true and why?

Yes, multiple breeder bills were introduced in 2011 and 2012, just as in previous years. As with all issues of importance (i.e., animals, education, the environment, healthcare, etc.), different individuals and groups have different opinions as to what works best. Sometimes varying viewpoints and approaches result in multiple bills. Other bills do not reflect the research, input and language changes stated above.

16. Why is regulation needed for this industry?

To protect animals, consumers and communities. See Talking Points.

17. Do other state laws already exist in Minnesota that solve this problem?

No. Some people believe that there are "already laws on the books" to address this issue. Minnesota does have animal anti-cruelty laws; however, this "system" is complaint-based — i.e., a person must see the inhumane conditions and report the cruelty or neglect; law enforcement may then decide to investigate; and a prosecutor may choose to take the case. This means animal anti-cruelty statutes, while vital, kick in after the cruelty occurs. Regulation is preventative — allowing authorities to legally enter the property and inspect breeding facilities so conditions can be assessed and cruelty can be prevented before it happens. Relying solely on reporting, cruelty investigations and prosecution is time-consuming and costly for local law enforcment, animal control, animal welfare organizations and the courts. Regulation is a more efficient use of resources.

18. Who led and supported these efforts?

Minnesotans. A large Coalition of humane societies, rescue groups, animal control, veterinarians, animal protection and advocacy organizations, and citizens introduced the first breeder bill five years ago, when the issue of inhumane dog and cat breeding practices was not known or understood at the Capitol. Over the years, huge strides have been made in educating legislators and the public.

This Coalition led S.F. 462/H.F. 702 and and supported the efforts of Rep. John Lesch (House author) and Sen. Barb Goodwin (Senate author). Coalition members include: A Rotta Love Plus, Animal Folks MN, Animal Humane Society, Minnesota Animal Control Association, Minnesota Humane Society, Minnesota Voters for Animal Protection, Minnkota Persian Rescue, Pet Haven Inc. of Minnesota, Retrieve A Golden of Minnesota, Second Chance Animal Rescue and Tri-County Humane Society.

In addition to Coalition members, numerous other people and organizations from throughout Minnesota expressed support of S.F. 462/H.F. 702, including:

• Over 40 Minnesota animal shelters, rescue groups, and animal control, and the Animal Law Section of the Minnesota State Bar Association.

• Over 220 Minnesota veterinarians and vet techs signed a letter of support (with more signing on each week).

• Over 18,000 petitions signed by Minnesotans in support of breeder regulation (includes petitions submitted in previous years); all petitions have been delivered directly to constituents' Senators and Representatives.

This Coalition and supporters will continue to work on breeder regulation — until a bill is passed into law.

19. What is the legislative history about this issue?

In 1994, a law was passed in the Minnesota Legislature regarding the sale of dogs and cats (the Pet Lemon Law, which is a consumer protection law). In 2007, a bill to regulate dog and cat breeders was introduced, but no hearings were granted. A revised bill was introduced in 2008; it did not pass. In 2009-2010, a renewed attempt was made. A bill was introduced in the MN Legislature to provide regulations of certain dog and cat breeders. Conversations were held with diverse groups, and compromise language was made to the bills. The House bill passed two committees; the Senate bill was voted down in the Senate Agriculture committee. 2011-2012 was a new biennial session — with new legislators and a new majority. No hearings were granted in 2011 or 2012.  Over the years, significant progress has been made in generating awareness and understanding of the problem; however, opposing interests have stopped passage of any reasonable regulation, leaving dogs and cats unprotected in breeding, brokering and retail operations.

20. Who is the opposition?

Over the years, "opposition" to breeder regulation has changed as people and groups become more informed. Unfortunately, some still present myths and lies to legislators. Key opposing views:

• As for "organized" opposition (paid lobbyists), the strongest voice against dog/cat breeder regultion has come from corporate agricultural interests. Some livestock associations and companies have feared that requiring a business to treat dogs and cats humanely is a slippery slope that can spill over to livestock — "pigs, cows and chickens will be next." However, other farm associations and individual farmers disagree — and have recognized the problem and support action.

• The National Rifle Association (NRA) and certain sporting/ hunting groups also lobbied against past bills, expressing a similar fear — "my freedoms will be taken away." However, other hunters/groups express support because they want well-bred hunting dogs.

• Some breeders have voiced opposition. In past hearings and meeting, breeders (small and large scale) have acknowledged a problem exists — but, as there are so many different breed groups and associations in Minnesota, many of them do not have agreement amongst themselves in regards to action.

• Breed registries, such as the American Kennel Club (AKC), have actively opposed breeder regulation nationwide and encouraged their members to lobby against it. (The AKC and other registries make money from each puppy registered.)

Creating laws is never easy; often the best tactic is communication — inform legislators about the problem and dispel the myths and fears. See Opposition.

21. Do breeders support regulation?

Some do; some don't. Often with regulation, if a particular sub-sector is excluded from the definition (i.e., not required to be licensed or regulated), they may offer support. Breeders of hunting and sporting dogs, for instance, have lobbied in past years to be excluded from any regulation. That exclusion alone could represent over 40 breeds — and assume that hunting/sporting dogs do not require standards of care.

Many breeders in Minnesota act responsibly and invest in the well-being of each animal. Reputable breeders understand animal husbandry and possess skills in animal health, care, genetics and other factors. Reputable breeders support regulation:

• Because they realize unscrupulous or negligent dog and cat breeders tarnish the reputation of all breeders

• Because they care about the health and well-being of all dogs and cats — not just their own

• Because they already obey laws and operate under high standards so don't fear regulation

There are some breeders and dealers, however, who view dogs and cats as inventory — to be bred as "stock" and sold as "products". Breeding, for these type of breeders, is about quantity (sales), not quality (animal health). When their livelihood is questioned (i.e., asked to conduct business at a higher standard), these type of breeders fight to keep the "status quo" rather than work towards innovative solutions.

22. What can I do to help?

See Spread The Word.

23. How do I contact my legislators and what do I say?

See Contact Legislators.

24. When did the 2011-2012 Minnesota legislative session end?

May 10 , 2012

25. When will the 2013-2014 Minnesota legislative session begin?

January 8, 2013