New York City Council Introduces Puppy Mill Bill
New York City Council Introduces Puppy Mill Bill

After years of effort from animal rights advocates, New York City Council introduced a bill in late February that would prohibit the sale of pets bred in puppy mills and kitten mills. The bill also imposes strict new requirements on pet store when it comes to caring for the puppies and kittens they sell.

Kitten and puppy mills are high volume breeding operations designed to supply a steady stream of pets to pet stores around the nation. The mills have come under scrutiny of animal rights advocates because some keep pets in inhumane conditions.

The bill explicitly prohibits pet shops to “offer for sale, deliver, barter, auction, give away, transfer, or sell any dog or cat obtained from”  a high volume breeder.

The bill defines a high volume breeder as anyone who owns breeding animals and sells more than 50 of their offspring in a one-year period, or anyone who owns more than 20 breeding animals.

A puppy mill bill was impossible to introduce in New York City until January this year. Prior to that, the state government retained the right to regulate pet stores. Animal rights advocates pushed for the state to give up control to municipalities, in part because the state’s regulating agency was understaffed and underfunded to regulate all of the pet stores throughout New York.

As a result of the advocate’s efforts, a state bill passed in both the assembly and the Senate that gave municipalities like New York City the authority to regulate pet stores. Governor Cuomo signed the bill in January. Days later on Feb. 26, City Council Member Elizabeth Crowley introduced Intro 55, or the puppy mill bill, in the New York City Council.

New York State will still enforce state laws regarding pet stores, but any municipality is free to enact tougher measures. The draft of the New York City Council bill includes tough requirements for pet shops in areas of housing, sanitation, feeding and watering, handling, and veterinary care.

Council members Corey Johnson, Maria Del Carmen Arroyo, Costa Constantinides, Mark Levine, Annabel Palma, and James Vacca sponsored the bill.

  • Denni A

    get it passed…pronto.

  • Marcella Covault

    >>Kitten and puppy mills are high volume breeding operations designed to supply a steady stream of pets to pet stores around the nation.<<
    Yet another definition to vilify more pet breeders. When the AR movement first started screaming "mill", it was substandard breeders. Now it's volume breeders, no matter how well they care for their animals. With the demand for pets in the millions every year. there is no way small breeders can fill that demand, and some areas have a very limited selection of shelter mutts (so much so, that dogs are shipped in from other areas and *thousands* come in from overseas each year under the umbrella of "rescue").

    CHOICE is the key concept here. Only a certain percentage of people want a no-history, no-guarantee shelter mutt. Most want a specific breed or cross-breed with a known history and some kind of health guarantee. That is a *reasonable expectation*, and people should have a choice in that regard. To limit a pet shop's animal sales to shelter/rescue dogs only is not even logical—it's an emotional disconnect with people and society. That legislators (who are supposed to be reasonably intelligent or people wouldn't elect them. Rights?) fall for this crap from the anti-pet-breeding brainwashed is unacceptable.

    • Denni A

      >>Kitten and puppy mills are high volume breeding operations designed to supply a steady stream of pets to pet stores around the nation.<<
      Yet another definition to vilify more pet breeders.

      where is the vilification??…that is a statement of fact.

      • Marcella Covault

        No, that is a statement of opinion…. an ever-changing opinion by the anti-breeding propaganda, designed to reduce the number of purpose-bred pets and force people to BUY a shelter or rescue animal (no-history, no guarantee as to temperament or health).

        • Denni A

          wrong, it is a statement of fact or else pet stores wouldn’t selling what they produce, pet stores don’t sell “opinions”.

          • Marcella Covault

            That didn’t even make sense, kind of like most of the emotional-based, non-factual arguments offered in justification of interferring with commerce and choice.

          • Denni A

            projecting yourself onto others ain’t cuttin’ it honey. the bill will pass whether you want it or not and then you can move onto the pro-horse slaughter drivel you like to spittle every where you post..(wink, wink).

          • Marcella Covault

            Yup, that’s right, get personal and ugly–typical when someone has a shaky position and can’t use intellect to justify it.

× close
Top