Editor’s note: This column ran as a pro-con with another column that argued in favor of House Bill 1011.
Colorado has some of the strongest laws for pets in the country. But a bill in the legislature,聽, would undo protections for pets by banning the sale of cats and dogs at licensed pet shops.
As a lifelong animal advocate who has run animal shelters as well as the national ASPCA, I once advocated for this policy. But I believe now it is a mistake.
The goal of this legislation is to target puppy mills — irresponsible dog breeders who don鈥檛 provide for animal welfare. But banning pet sales at pet stores doesn鈥檛 actually accomplish that goal.
Pet stores in Colorado must be licensed and must get their dogs from professional breeders. These breeders are licensed and inspected by the USDA and typically have additional licensing and inspection requirements at the state level, as well.
Puppy mills, meanwhile, sell their dogs through different means. You may see signs in the median at a stoplight offering puppies with a phone number. You may see a post on Craigslist. Or, increasingly, you鈥檒l see sellers on TikTok or social media offering puppies for sale.
If we want to target puppy mills, we shouldn鈥檛 focus on licensed and inspected professional dog breeders. Those breeders do occasionally have issues, but that抖阴ap the point of the inspections. They catch problems and fix them. They hold violators accountable.
Puppy mills, by contrast, operate entirely outside this system — and the only way to shut them down is through targeted enforcement and investigations into the black markets where they thrive.
There is no evidence that banning retail dog sales has ever closed a puppy mill. Nearly 20 years ago, advocates claimed we needed these laws to fight back against an estimated 10,000 puppy mills. Since then, several states and hundreds of localities have passed such laws. Yet advocates today still claim there are 10,000 puppy mills.
Not only would banning pet sales at pet stores fail to stop puppy mills, it would actually help these bad actors.
Consider: If this bill passes, and a family wants to get a certain breed of dog, where are they going to look?
Having run animal shelters and been an early leader of the 鈥渘o kill鈥� movement, I have long advocated that people adopt from shelters. But shelters don鈥檛 always have the breeds that people are looking for or sometimes require.
Prospective pet owners, then, will naturally look on the internet, where puppy mills thrive. That抖阴ap exactly what happened after California passed a statewide pet-sale ban a few years ago, with a media investigation聽finding聽鈥渁 network of resellers — including ex-cons and schemers 鈥� replaced pet stores as middlemen.鈥�
Driving pets and people into a black market is wrong. There are fewer protections for pets, and fewer for consumers, as well.
There needs to be well-regulated choices for people to get pets. Pet stores provide one option.
House Bill 1011 has a final contradiction: proponents say that it抖阴ap OK for people to buy from licensed breeders, just not through a pet store. Instead, if this bill passes, families would have to drive to a breeder, probably many hours away, or even travel out of state.
This is obviously impractical for many families, which is why they will look for a dog online instead.
But more importantly, if a breeder is doing everything right, then what is the problem with that breeder selling through a local store in Colorado? As long as dogs are well cared for, there shouldn鈥檛 be any objection.
That抖阴ap especially true given that many breeders are now signing up for third-party certification called Canine Care Certified. This program was developed by animal welfare scientists at Purdue University in Indiana. House Bill 1011 would prohibit dogs from even these top-of-the-line certified facilities.
A good animal protection policy should focus on making sure animal welfare objectives are met. While House Bill 1011 is well-intentioned, it will cause more harm than good.
贰诲听厂补测谤别蝉聽is the former CEO of the ASPCA and former president of the San Francisco Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, whose career in animal welfare spans four decades.
To send a letter to the editor about this article, submit online or check out our guidelines for how to submit by email or mail.
