Running head: BATTLING BREEDERS 1

BATTLING BREEDERS: Different Methods of Pet Adoption

Grace Rotolo

First Colonial High School

Legal Studies Academy

BATTLING BREEDERS 2

Abstract

This paper highlights the differences between breeding and puppy mills, pet stores, and animal

shelters. The advantages and disadvantages of these adoption methods are explained along with

the causes and effects of the issues. Legislation, both specific to pet adoptions and general to

animal welfare, are included on state, federal, and global levels. In addition, court cases relevant

to commercial breeding and pet adoption are introduced and analyzed. Lastly, the paper

concludes with the description of future consequences if animal welfare continues to be

sacrificed for profits, as well as, suggests some potential solutions to solve this ongoing issue.
BATTLING BREEDERS 3

Different Methods of Pet Adoption: The Good and Bad

In the United States alone, there are approximately 10,000 active puppy mills

(Humane Society, n.d.). Additionally, there are different ways to adopt pets, each varying in their

treatment of animals and environment conditions, and each having different effects on the pets

and their prospective owners. Other than using puppy mills, other ways to adopt pets include

breeders, pet stores, and animal shelters; all of which have their own advantages and

disadvantages. Organizations like the Humane Society, the American Society for the Prevention

of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA), and People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) make

it their purpose to advocate for these animals, who cannot fight for themselves, to be treated in

the most ethical and the most humane ways.

Breeders and Puppy Mills

While breeders and puppy mills are similarly associated, there is a definite and clear

distinction between the two terms. A breeder’s production can range from a few puppies to a few

hundred. While breeders tend to have a negative connotation associated with them, there are

some breeders that treat and breed the animals ethically and humanely fair. Puppy mills are a

term for more specifically describing a type of breeder and their production. In these mills are

hundreds of puppies, many are mistreated, neglected, or injured. The mills are responsible for

breeding so many puppies that there are not always enough resources to supplement them. These

resources not only include food and shelter but also the workers meant to take care of the

animals (Hall, 2017/2018).

Effects

With the insufficient care provided to puppies by bad breeders or in puppy mills, those
BATTLING BREEDERS 4

puppies tend to suffer more. Those puppies’ only purpose is to look cute for someone else’s

profit. Many of the puppies adopted suffer from health problems causing them to have a shorter

life span (Magnifico, 2015). Adopting an unhealthy puppy mill puppy can cause the new owner

may problems and expenses. The pet’s health condition could require around-the-clock medical

care, multiple procedures, or euthanasia; all of these treatments can be both emotionally and

financially draining.

Law(s) Specific to Breeders and Puppy Mills

Different places have varying laws and legislation regarding the pet breeding process.

Virginia’s dog breeding requirements for large scale purposes, puppy mills, are outlined in the

Virginia Code § 3.2-6507.2. This code limits the maximum holding capacity for commercial

breeding to 50 female dogs between 18 months and 8 years. It also requires these commercial

breeders to get annual checkups performed on the animals. If a person wishes to hold more than

the maximum capacity for breeding, then they must talk to the local authorities (Commercial

Dog Breeding, n.d.).

Pet Stores

Just like breeders, there are different types of places to purchase a pet, differing by

whether or not they treat the animals well or poorly. While a majority of the pet stores are more

profit-oriented, there are some that prioritize the well-being of the animals.

Effects

Typically after animals are adopted from pet stores, where they are often purchased from

puppy mills, their life span can be less than those adopted from animal shelters. With the less

than optimal conditions present in pet stores, an animal’s health can be directly affected. The
BATTLING BREEDERS 5

decline of an animal’s health tends to take a toll on the new owners. When the newly adopted pet

becomes sick, the owner takes it to the veterinarian, resulting in unnecessary worrying about

their condition and extra money spent on medical bills.

Law(s) Specific to Pet Stores

Some states have begun to pass laws and regulations in an attempt to regulate what pet

stores do. Leading by example, California’s Governor Jerry Brown was the first in the United

States to sign a law banning the sale of “commercially raised dogs, cat, and rabbits” in the state’s

pet stores (ASPCA, 2017). Following the precedent set by California, Governor Larry Hogan

signed the legislation banning the sale of mill-bred puppies and kittens in pet stores, making

Maryland the second state to do so. By enacting this law, Governor Hogan hopes to eliminate

demands for these commercial mills and spread awareness surrounding their underlying dangers.

While many animal rights advocates were thankful for this new legislation, there were pet store

owners who vehemently opposed the passing of the law. Many of these owners claimed to be

responsible and thoroughly background checked the breeder whom they received their pets from

(Chason, 2018).

Animal Shelters

One of the most common and most affordable methods of pet adoption is through an

animal shelter. The purpose of animal shelters is to provide a safe place for lost or abandoned

animals to stay until they can be given a permanent home. They also help take care of sick

animals and rehabilitate them back to health.

Shelters receive these animals for many different reasons. One common reason is the
BATTLING BREEDERS 6

overpopulation of animals, specifically puppies and kittens. Many people may already have a

pet, but then it gives birth to a whole litter of baby animals that become too much much time,

effort, and expense to take care of. Another common reason is the surrendering of a pet. Usually,

people’s justification is because of financial or health issues, relocation, or the pet’s behavior.

Finally, there are lost or stray animals that get turned into the animal shelter. Sometimes, the

person who finds the animal does want to keep it. In the past, there have been many influxes of

animals coming into the VBSPCA because of natural disasters because they could not be

reconnected to their owners.

Bad Intentions

While a majority of animal shelters have good intentions, there are a rare few groups

of people that do not. With a higher amount of animals being given to live in “no-kill” or

“turn-away” shelters, they may become overpopulated and under resourced. This results in the

shelters sending away animals they are unable to take at the time or putting them on a waiting

list. On account of this, the animals turned away can end up worse off than they would have

been. They can end up in unhealthy conditions, such as abandoned on the streets or somewhere

unwanted. There are some rare groups of people who disguise themselves as shelters. In reality,

these people are animal hoarders who are putting the lives of animals at risk (PETA, n.d.).

Pet-Flipping

Over the past few years, a new scam referred to as “pet-flipping” has developed and

gained more media coverage. This illegal act occurs when a person uses unethical means to

acquire a pet with the intent to give it away for profit. Pet-flippers may use different means to
BATTLING BREEDERS 7

acquire these animals. The pets may be strays, lost, or even stolen. Any pet can become a victim

of this crime (Pet Industry Joint Advisory Council Admin, 2013).

Animal Hoarding

Every year, approximately 250,000 animals suffer from the complicated issue referred

to as animal hoarding, according to the ASPCA. The organization defines animal hoarding as

“​when an individual is housing more animals than he or she can adequately care for” (ASPCA,

n.d.). In some cases, mental health plays a significant role in the situation, and the person doing

this might believe they are helping the animals.

However, there are other animal hoarding cases where malicious intent motivates a

person’s actions. This is the case for Vickie Kittles who hoarded over 100 dogs, most of whom

were ill, injured, or dying. Kittles managed to escape different authorities many times with

different aliases, different personalities, and manipulations. After the almost two year case in

Oregon, animal advocate groups worked with Oregon legislators to strengthen animal cruelty

laws (Animal Legal Defense Fund, 2018).

Overarching Laws and Regulations

There are both local and widespread laws in place to regulate the treatment and

welfare of domestic animals and pets, preventing inhumane treatment and cruelty, just in general.

Even with these multiple laws that have been enacted, problems still tend to occur because

people’s evasion of the law causes it to be harder for the government to enforce it.

Federal

In the United States, there are only a few acts of federal legislation in place to protect
BATTLING BREEDERS 8

animals. The Animal Welfare Act (AWA), which was enacted in 1966, and it regulates the

standards for animals regarding how they are treated. In addition to commercially bred animals,

the act also applies to animals in captivity, like ones in zoos or those being scientifically tested

on (Animal Legal Defense Fund, 2018).

Under the 49 U.S.C. § 80502, the federal government regulates the transportation of

animals, relating to animal confinement and feeding. This law typically refers to animals used in

industrial production like cows or sheep. However, with the large-scale commercialization of

breeders, this code can apply to some breeders who travel far distances over long periods of time

(Transportation of Animals, n.d.). There are two other federal legislations for the protection of

animals, but they specifically protect livestock and endangered species.

State/Local

In addition to the federal legislations, all 50 states have laws against animal cruelty,

including both misdemeanor and felony classifications, depending on the severity of the act

committed. All of the states’ legislation explicitly state the definition of animal cruelty. Then

they provide punishments ranging from fines to imprisonment. Some of the laws have

exceptions, such as, hunting, fishing, etc. (Stray Pet Advocacy, 2003). In the Virginia Code §3.2,

the entirety of chapter 65 is split into 13 articles to establish regulations on animal care and

welfare for breeders, owners, scientists, veterinarians, and authority figures (Comprehensive

Animal, n.d.).

Outside the United States

Unfortunately, cases involving animal welfare and pet breeding is not only an issue in the

United States but is also a worldwide problem.

BATTLING BREEDERS 9

Europe.​ Members of the Council of Europe composed the European Convention for the

Protection of Pet Animals, which was incorporated into the European Treaty Series. The Council

of Europe includes 47 different nations, including those involved in the European Union. These

articles establish regulations for animal care, but they also have sections advocating for the

animals’ rights including breeding, entertainment, and surgical operations (Council of Europe,

n.d.). The article about breeding states the following:

Any person who selects a pet animal for breeding shall be responsible for having regard

to the anatomical, physiological and behavioural characteristics which are likely to put at

risk the health and welfare of either the offspring or the female parent. (Council of

Europe, n.d.)

Germany​. While Germany is part of both the Council of Europe and the European

Union, the country has its own legislation, the German Animal Welfare Act. The legislation

begins, “the aim of this act is to protect the lives and well-being of animals, based on the

responsibility of human beings for their fellow creatures. No one may cause an animal pain,

suffering or harm without good reason” (“German Animal,” 2010). The law includes a separate

section for animal breeding, requiring owners to be trained or experienced and to show no signs

of mistreatment towards the animals (“German Animal,” 2010).

Court Cases

While in the case of ​United States v. Stevens,​ the specific topic of breeding is not the

issue, but the overall topic of animal welfare is at question. The defendant Robert Stevens

produced and sold video footage of dogfights. Stevens was prosecuted under 18 U.S.C. § 48,

which states the following:

BATTLING BREEDERS 10

Whoever knowingly creates, sells, or possesses a depiction of animal cruelty with the

intention of placing that depiction in interstate or foreign commerce for commercial gain,

shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both. (​United States

v. Stevens​, 2010, slip op.)

The question in this case was whether or not 18 U.S.C. § 48 violated Stevens’ 1st Amendment

rights. The higher court ruled that the unspecificity of the law caused it to be unconstitutional,

and they overturned Stevens’ previous conviction.

Breeders and Puppy Mills

In cases like ​Strawser v. Wright​ and ​Rotunda v. Haynes,​ the negligence of the breeders

led to more suffering for the animals and their health. In ​Strawser v. Wright​, Linda Strawser’s

grandon purchased a Yorkie puppy from Juanita Wright. At the time, Wright states that the

puppy received the necessary vaccines. Almost a month later, the puppy died of parvo, a serious

disease in canines if not treated immediately. Strawser requested damages for negligent infliction

of emotional distress. In Ohio, unfortunately, only under certain circumstances can a person be

granted recover for negligent infliction of emotional distress. In addition, the state of Ohio

consider pets as a person’s property in the eyes of the law (​Strawser v. Wright,​ 1992). In ​Rotunda

v. Haynes​, Maggie Rotunda received a dog through a third party, as a gift. After discovering the

dog had a heart condition, Rotunda later sued the breeder, Frank Haynes, to recover medical

expenses. Under the General Business Law § 752, Rotunda was not the one who purchased the

dog from Haynes and cannot sue for damages. She was unable to provide evidence that Haynes

breached the “implied warranty of merchantability,” and was unable to recover damages

(​Rotunda v. Haynes​, 2011).

BATTLING BREEDERS 11

Pet Stores

Under the Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law, there is a section

specifically amended for those purchasing dogs. The law requires that the seller must provide

certain information to the buyer, including information about the breeder. In ​Cavallini v. Pet City

and Supplies Inc​., appellee Christopher Cavallini tried and failed to seek more information from

the store after purchasing a Yorkie, which was said to be purebred. The court ruled in favor of

Cavallini, who received over $1,600 in damages because of Pet City’s violation of the Unfair

Trade Practice and Consumer Protection Law (​Cavallini v. Pet City and Supplies Inc​., 2004).

Conclusion

If these commercial breeders and pet stores continue their same processes at the

expense of animal welfare, the consequences in the future will become worse. It will become

harder to recover from the loss and injuries resulting from the sacrifices of the animals.

Hopefully, animal shelters like the SPCA and local non-profits will be the main sources of

adoption in the future. The government should do more to regulate and enforce legislation

involving the production and sale of commercially bred animals. With enough help from both

local and federal government, those making efforts to stop and prevent animal cruelty will feel

more supported with their cause.

BATTLING BREEDERS 12

References

Animal Abuse. (2016). Retrieved from Gale Research in Context database.

Animal Legal Defense Fund. (2006, August 1). Case Study: Animal Hoarding – Vikki Kittles.

Retrieved November 24, 2018, from

https://aldf.org/case/animal-hoarding-case-study-vikki-kittles/

Animal Legal Defense Fund. (2018). Laws that Protect Animals. Retrieved December 12, 2018,

from https://aldf.org/article/laws-that-protect-animals/

Animal Welfare Institute. (n.d.). Animal Welfare Act. Retrieved November 23, 2018, from

https://awionline.org/content/animal-welfare-act

Animal Welfare; Retail Pet Stores and Licensing Exemptions, 9 C.F.R. (). Retrieved from

https://www.aphis.usda.gov/newsroom/2013/09/pdf/pet_retail_docket_2011-003.pdf

ASPCA. (n.d.). Animal Hoarding. Retrieved December 18, 2018, from

https://www.aspca.org/animal-cruelty/animal-hoarding

ASPCA (Ed.). (2017, October 14). California becomes first state in U.S. to ban sale of puppy

mill dogs in pet stores. Retrieved November 7, 2018, from

https://www.aspca.org/about-us/press-releases/california-becomes-first-state-us-ban-sale-

puppy-mill-dogs-pet-stores

Cavallini v. Pet City and Supplies Inc., 848 A.2d 1002 (Penn. Super. Ct. Apr. 26, 2004).

Retrieved from https://www.animallaw.info/case/cavallini-v-pet-city-and-supply

Chason, R. (2018, April 24). Gov. Hogan signed a law banning Maryland pet stores from using

'puppy mills.' Store owners are pushing back. ​Washington Post.​ Retrieved from

http://go.galegroup.com/ps/retrieve.do?tabID=News&resultListType=RESULT_LIST&s
BATTLING BREEDERS 13

earchResultsType=MultiTab&searchType=BasicSearchForm&currentPosition=1&docId

=GALE%7CA536073129&docType=Article&sort=Relevance&contentSegment=&prodI

d=GIC&contentSet=GALE%7CA536073129&searchId=R2&userGroupName=vbcps&in

PS=true

Commercial Dog Breeding; Requirements, Va. Code Ann. § 3.2-6507.2 (Supp. 2017). Retrieved

from https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacode/title3.2/chapter65/section3.2-6507.2/

Comprehensive Animal Care, Va. Code Ann. § 3.2-6500. Retrieved from

https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacode/title3.2/part/section3.2-6570/

Council of Europe. (n.d.). European Convention for the Protection of Pet Animals. Retrieved

December 19, 2018, from https://rm.coe.int/168007a67d

DogTime Staff. (n.d.). Arrest sheds light on "dog-flipping" issue [Blog post]. Retrieved from

https://dogtime.com/trending/17406-arrest-in-dog-flipping-incident

Doris Day Animal League v. Veneman, 315 F.3d 297 (Aug., 2003). Retrieved from

https://www.justice.gov/osg/brief/doris-day-animal-league-v-veneman-opposition

Favre, D. (2002). Overview of U.S. Animal Welfare Act. Retrieved December 14, 2018, from

https://www.animallaw.info/article/overview-us-animal-welfare-act

Feger v. Warwick Animal Shelter, 29 A.D. 3d 515 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. App. Div. May 2, 2006).

Retrieved from

https://www.justice.gov/osg/brief/doris-day-animal-league-v-veneman-opposition

German Animal Welfare Act. (2010, October). Retrieved December 20, 2018, from

https://www.animallaw.info/statute/germany-cruelty-german-animal-welfare-act
BATTLING BREEDERS 14

Hall, C. (2018). Pet Stores Should Not Sell Animals from Commercial Breeders. In ​Opposing

Viewpoints Online Collection​. Retrieved from Opposing Viewpoints in Context database.

(Excerpted from Puppy mills are hubs of animal cruelty. We don't need their business in

California, ​Los Angeles Times,​ 2017, September 20)

Halpern, N. E. (2014, December 1). The Illegal Practice Called "Pet Flipping" [Blog post].

Retrieved from

https://animallaw.foxrothschild.com/2014/12/01/the-illegal-practice-called-pet-flipping/

Humane Society. (n.d.). Fighting Animal Cruelty and Neglect. Retrieved December 15, 2018,

from https://www.humanesociety.org/all-our-fights/fighting-animal-cruelty-and-neglect

Humane Society. (n.d.). Stopping puppy mills. Retrieved December 10, 2018, from

https://www.humanesociety.org/all-our-fights/stopping-puppy-mills

International Society for Animal Rights. (n.d.). Dog Overpopulation and puppy mills. Retrieved

December 12, 2018, from

https://isaronline.org/programs/dog-and-cat-overpopulation/dog-overpopulation-and-pup

py-mills/

Magnifico, K. (2015). TAKE A STAND and educate your clients about pet breeders. ​Veterinary

Economics​, ​56​(6). Retrieved from ProQuest database.

N.Y. Pet Welfare Ass'n Inc. v. City of New York, 850 F.3d 79 (2d Cir. Mar. 2, 2017).

O'Rourke v. American Kennels, 7 Misc. 3d 1018 (Civ. Ct. Apr. 27, 2005). Retrieved from

https://www.animallaw.info/case/orourke-v-american-kennels-unpublished-disposition

PETA. (n.d.). Animal shelters. Retrieved December 6, 2018, from

https://www.peta.org/issues/animal-companion-issues/animal-shelters/
BATTLING BREEDERS 15

Pet Industry Joint Advisory Council Admin. (2013, September 9). Pet Flipping - Avoid

Becoming a Victim [Blog post]. Retrieved from

https://pijac.org/blog/pet-flipping-avoid-becoming-victim

Rotunda v. Haynes, 33 Misc. 3d 68 (N.Y. Sup. Ct., App. Term Oct. 11, 2011). Retrieved from

https://www.animallaw.info/case/rotunda-v-haynes

State v. Criswell, 305 P.3d 760 (Montana Sup. Ct. July 2, 2013). Retrieved from

https://www.animallaw.info/case/state-v-criswell

Strawser v. Wright, 610 N.E.2d 610 (O12 Dist. App. Ct. July 2, 1992). Retrieved from

https://www.animallaw.info/case/strawser-v-wright

Stray Pet Advocacy. (2003). ​Animal Cruelty Laws State By State​ [Fact sheet]. Retrieved

December 18, 2018, from

http://www.straypetadvocacy.org/PDF/AnimalCrueltyLaws.pdf

Swiss Federal Act on Animal Protection and Animal Protection Ordinance. (2014, September).

Retrieved December 19, 2018, from

https://www.animallaw.info/statute/switzerland-cruelty-federal-act-and-ordinance-animal

-cruelty

Tomaselli, P. (2003). Brief Summary of International Comparative Animal Cruelty Laws.

Retrieved December 18, 2018, from

https://www.animallaw.info/article/brief-summary-international-comparative-animal-crue

lty-laws

Transportation of Animals, 49 U.S.C. § 80502 (Supp. 2009). Retrieved from

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/49/80502
BATTLING BREEDERS 16

United States v. Stevens, No. 08-769 (3d Cir. Apr. 20, 2010). Retrieved from

https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/cert/08-769

United States v. Stevens, 559 U.S. 460 (3d Cir. Apr. 20, 2010). Retrieved from

https://www.oyez.org/cases/2009/08-769

Victorian family fined $200k over 'rancid' puppy breeding farm. (2015, September 24).

Australian Broadcasting Company.​ Retrieved from

https://search.proquest.com/docview/1715816994/fulltext/8C2A69759A9473APQ/1?acc

ountid=3785#