Lawmakers are considering a bill which aims to outlaw the sale of animals from commercial breeders like puppy mills at pet stores in Connecticut.
House Bill No. 5386 would prohibit pet shops from selling or trading dogs, cats or rabbits that are not sourced from animal welfare organizations or animal control units.
The proposal has generated strong opinions, with supporters calling it necessary to help prevent animal abuse. Others, however, say local lawmakers need to further study the impact of similar laws in states like California before taking action here, as there is the potential for a negative impact on pet shops and animals.
State Rep. Raghib Allie-Brennan (D-2) of Bethel is a sponsor of the bill. According to Allie-Brennan, negligence in the pet shop industry is a “very real problem in our state.”
The bill was voted out of the Environment Committee with a provision calling for more research and recommendations from the Department of Agriculture. The provision asked the DOA to review California’s requirement that pet shops offer dogs, cats and rabbits for sale only if they are from a municipal animal shelter or rescue organization, then report back by Jan. 1, 2020 on how well it is working or if there are negative issues related to enforcement or business impacts.
Earlier this month, Allie-Brennan joined with animal-rights groups to advocate for an amendment to the bill which would prohibit Connecticut pet shops from selling dogs, cats and rabbits “originating from puppy mills and other cruel commercial breeding facilities.”
According to the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS), puppy mills focus on profits over the health of the animals, which often suffer from various ailments and need veterinary care.
“The legislature must take decisive action to clearly affirm that Connecticut will not stand by and allow cruelly sourced dogs, cats and rabbits to be sold in our pet stores,” Allie-Brennan said, in a May news release from his office. “Calling for further research and study is just kicking the can down the road. We already know what we have to do. The bipartisan amendment I have introduced is the appropriate and needed response to Connecticut pet stores’ long standing business practice of importing cruelly bred animals into our state, and I encourage my fellow legislators to consider and support this language.”
Debora Bresch, senior state legislative director with the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, said Connecticut has tried to prevent pet stores from selling cruelly bred animals for many years.
“It is now time to take stronger action,” she said.
Gwyn Donohue, director of communications and media relations with the Pet Industry Joint Advisory Council (PIJAC) in Virginia, called HB 5386 “well-intended but misguided.”
According to Donohue, Connecticut’s pet store and breeder sourcing laws and regulations are already among the strictest in the country.
“Lawmakers recognized that a Connecticut pet sales ban won’t stop bad breeders across the country when they sensibly established these laws and regulations in 2013,” Donohue said. “The Joint Environment Committee again took the thoughtful route when, after carefully considering stakeholder input, they advanced an amended HB 5386 that orders a study on the impact of California’s four-month-old ban before enacting a similar law.”
Donohue asserted that moving ahead without this study puts Connecticut “in danger of leaping before they look.”
Laura (Peach) Reid, president and CEO of Fish Mart in West Haven, said she supports the DOA doing a study and reporting back, so lawmakers have more information before taking action. Reid, chair of the board of directors for PIJAC, has been in business for 45 years, and she sells fish and birds, but not puppies or kittens.
“The pet shops in Connecticut are licensed, regulated and inspected,” Reid said. “The responsible pet-care community worked with legislators to create rigid regulations. We welcome a report which would study the California law, and we think it is in everyone’s best interest to see what a review finds.”
During the public hearing process, Reid asserted to lawmakers, “You’re being asked to throw away regulations that are currently protecting pets and Connecticut consumers and to require stores to source from shelters and rescues whose practices are far less regulated and transparent.”
John Santamaria III, who works at the Wallingford All Pets Club, also spoke against the proposal.
According to Santamaria, if the bill passes, people will still want purebred breeds.
“This usually ends up with people buying dogs from out of state, and then having them flown in from ‘breeders’ that are held to lower health standards,” he said. “This could, in turn, supply puppy mills with more business to remain open, which is the opposite goal of what this bill is trying to prevent.”
Debbie Bauman, owner of Barkery Boo-tique in New Milford, sells pet treats and supplies, but not animals. Bauman told lawmakers the proposal is a “step in the right direction.”
It “would help lift the burden off shelter and rescues of finding families for homeless pets, many of which are euthanized each year in Connecticut.”
Contact Michelle Tuccitto Sullo at msullo@newhavenbiz.com.
