The bill died in committee on February 18 without even being heard by the Oklahoma House Ag Committee. Many Oklahomans question this outcome, which was immediately condemned by the Tulsa World.
Puppy producers that sell wholesale, (through dog brokers, dog auctions, etc), are required to be licensed through the USDA, as either Class A or Class B dealers. Breeders that sell directly to the public, either through the internet, flea markets or local advertisements, are exempted from federal licensing and remain unregulated in Oklahoma.
High volume dog breeders, along with substandard facilities often called ‘puppy mills,’ are rapidly on the rise in Oklahoma. Confusion surrounds this often secretive industry, which has grown dramatically in the last five years here; Oklahoma now ranks second in the nation in the number of licensed high volume breeders, with an increase of over 70% since 2000.
According to the USDA, Oklahoma has 12.3% of the total number of USDA licensed pet producing facilities nationwide, with over 600 breeders located here. The number of unlicensed facilities in Oklahoma is estimated to be two to three times that number.
All other states with a large number of high volume dog producers have state regulations to cover facilities not regulated by the USDA.
In fact, although a total of five states, Oklahoma, Missouri, Nebraska, Kansas and Iowa, produce over 65% of the nation’s mass produced puppies, 26 states actually govern the care and selling of producing dogs. In Oklahoma, unless federally licensed, pet producers operate under no regulations at all.
The term ‘puppy mills’ generally refers to substandard high volume puppy (or kitten) producers that turn out animals under very poor conditions, with no regard for animal welfare, the health of the puppies or the consumers who buy them. While the USDA licensed high volume facilities are expected to meet minimum regulations, the picture for many dogs that are in unlicensed facilities is grim.
The overwhelming numbers of animal neglect complaints regarding high volume breeders lodged with law enforcement, state agencies or humane societies in Oklahoma do not involve facilities that are USDA inspected. This means they are not compelled to follow any regulations.
Additionally, during the last two years, over 600 dogs have been removed from facilities posing as rescues. Despite even having non-profit status, these facilities have allowed animals to starve or be used for breeding; an Oklahoma County individual that claimed to be rescuing Pit Bull dogs was actually tied to a dog fighting operation. This bill would have created minimum standards for private shelters and rescues, including regulations for cleanliness and record keeping.
Many breeding dogs in substandard facilities languish in tiny cages, and in filth. To save money on the cost of housing dogs, puppy mill kennels can consist of anything from small cages made of wood and wire mesh, to tractor-trailer cabs or simple tethers attached to trees. Cages stacked on top of each other mean that urine and feces run down from one cage onto the one below. It is not uncommon for dogs in these facilities to be blinded by the ammonia burns to their eyes.
Deborah Howard, President of CAPS, a Massachusetts based organization dedicated to halting puppy mills, said, “Puppy mills operate like a business, except instead of car parts or shampoo, the “goods” are puppies to be sold to consumers. Much like any other business, there are three basic operating principals; the increase of goods, the decrease of costs, and the maximization of profits. In puppy mills dogs are bred for quantity, not quality. As a direct result, breeders, brokers, and pet stores ensure maximum profits by not spending money for proper food, housing, or veterinary care.”
Normal veterinary care is often completely lacking; hiding the truth of their practices, some operators of these facilities have advised customers to avoid veterinarians. Many substandard facilities perform their own C-sections on female dogs unable to give birth on their own.
When the dogs are no longer able to produce puppies, terrified dogs are sold at the growing number of auctions in our state, with an older dog barely bringing a dollar or two to a greedy seller who will not give the dog a humane end because it would cost money to euthanize the dog.
Indeed, Oklahoma’s lack of regulations makes our state a haven for those who cannot pass regulations enacted elsewhere. As regulations have tightened in New York and Pennsylvania, estimates are that the number of unregulated breeders that have flocked to Oklahoma in recent years may make us number one in unlicensed facilities. The toll includes consumer issues, fraud, animal neglect and health issues involving untested and unvaccinated dogs. As a cash crop, Oklahoma loses out on the tax revenue in most cases.
Tara Beres, Director of Safe Haven Center in Midwest City, has assisted in the rescue of puppy mill dogs for the past two years. Referring to HB 3192, the Pet Quality Assurance Act, Beres noted, “There is no reason that this bill did not pass. The regulations were based on USDA regulations, and those are weaker than most Oklahomans would tolerate if they knew the truth. This bill gave an edge to those that were already licensed as they already meet the criteria, and were exempted from inspections. It’s hard to imagine what happened.”
With no time to garner support for the bill, the 17 month effort to draft a comprehensive, effective and fair bill died a quiet death in the OK House Ag committee. Many Oklahomans wonder why. Two minor activities reveal that Oklahomans who support humane treatment of dogs and cats used for production need to become vocal now in order to be heard next year.
The AKC (American Kennel Club) is required to inspect facilities housing AKC-registered dogs that produce seven or more litters in one year. A January 23, 2008, e-mail from Oklahoma AKC inspector Stacy Mason alleged that USDA standards are too restrictive, and that following the regulations compromised breeders who already exceed the regulations. Mason’s complaints included excessive fees. However, HB 3192 proposed a licensing fee of $25, while AKC facility inspections start at $250 per inspection. Her plea ended with a sample letter to send to legislators entitled, ‘Kill the bill.’
The AKC communications office has not responded to calls about inspector Mason’s e-mails.
Weeks before the legislative session the Humane Society of the United States was advised that a knee jerk reaction from certain legislators could negatively impact the bill and were asked to remain out of the issue as other national groups were doing. Within days of being advised that this legislation could not withstand being tied to their overall agenda, HSUS announced their legislative lobbying day, which was actually noted as impacting the bill by a committee member. Although the day was planned as a national event, HSUS refused the request to cancel the Oklahoma day when advised that it would likely backfire on legislation as has been alleged to have occurred elsewhere.
Exactly what happened is unknown. The actions by the AKC representative and HSUS are minor but they make it clear that it will take a strong collective voice by Oklahomans about a substandard industry that is giving a black eye to our state and is costing us in the ways that any clandestine industry will do.
Beres again said that the issue cannot be the wording of the bill but a fear of inspection at all. She referred to the USDA regulations, which stipulate that a dog must have space that equals its length from nose to base of tail, plus six inches, times the same amount of space, plus six inches of head room. This means that an average sized beagle may spend its life in a cage that is around 32” by 32”.
Beres continued, “Just a few breeders came up with phantom problems with the bill that amounted to fabrications. The fact is that if these regulations scared you, there is something very wrong with the way you are doing things. At one point, they said they wanted to use education to reach people who are doing things wrong. How do you educate people that keeping a dog in filth, often in sheds with no lighting, inadequate diet and no veterinary care is not nice?”
She concluded, “One thing is for certain, very few Oklahomans who are not dog breeders approve of the industry the way it is, and even fewer of those who have purchased poor quality puppies want to see it remain unregulated.”
Many people are asking why these facilities are leaving other states to come here, and even some breeders who have invested heavily to build kennels in Oklahoma would like to see the movement of substandard kennels to Oklahoma slowed, as it brings low-end competition into the mix.
Charles Helwig, DVM, Executive Director of the Oklahoma Veterinary Medical Association said, “The Pet Quality Assurance Act, which is HB 3192, is an important step in regulating the commercial kennels in Oklahoma. Oklahoma is one of the largest producing states for puppies and kittens, yet does not have any state regulations. This legislation is a consumer protection bill that is needed to address consumer complaints and animal welfare.” Helwig encouraged citizens who are concerned about this issue to contact legislators to make their voices heard.
http://www.caps-web.org
http://www.okpuppymill.truth.org
