There’s a political truism when evaluating the hundreds of animal welfare and environmental bills being considered around the United States: As California goes, so goes the nation.
That’s why it’s important to scrutinize California’s AB 485, a bill purportedly aimed at supporting the welfare of tens of millions of animals in California by targeting substandard breeders and promoting shelters and rescues.
The bill is racing towards passage and will set a national precedent for the 70 million American homes with a dog. It would affect the millions of citizens who cannot easily find pets to meet their companion, service or allergy needs — including veterans with post-traumatic stress disorder in need of service dogs and people with chronic illness who need specific breeds.
It’s likely to have the opposite effect of its stated goal. The law will stimulate business for inhumane profiteers. It would eliminate the use of federally-regulated pet sources and replace them with organizations that have virtually no governmental oversight. AB 485 would require pet stores to exclusively use public sources for animals, a move that will supposedly increase adoptions from rescue organizations and shelters.
Unfortunately, the bill is based on a very old and very false narrative that’s heavy on emotion and light on facts. For decades, there’s been a common belief that there is a dog overpopulation crisis in the U.S. In fact, the opposite is true: There is a shortage of new puppies. In the last few months, scientific data by Mississippi State University and the Pet Leadership Council show a significant gap between the supply and demand of puppies. And, that gap will widen by an additional seven million dogs over the next decade.
But the problem gets worse.
Even if every single adoptable shelter dog were adopted, those dogs would satisfy less than one-third of the annual demand. Shelters — at least reputable ones — do not produce dogs. New puppies must come from elsewhere. Alarmingly, animal rescues have resorted to importing dogs, with numerous rescues publicly advertising their imports from Mexico and Asia. That’s what happens when rescues go unregulated.
Tens of millions of Americans have circumstances that make adopting shelter dogs an unrealistic option and require alternative sources like responsible breeders. For military veterans with PTSD and individuals with disabilities or medical disorders, service dogs are precisely trained and are limited to specific breeds. And, for Americans who suffer from pet allergies, it’s critical to find an allergy-friendly breed.
AB 485 would restrict citizens’ access to responsible breeders, even though it’s clear that rescues and shelters simply cannot come close to meeting the demand for puppies.
This dilemma exists because radical advocacy groups have spent years and millions of dollars distorting public perception for their own self-interest. They systematically attack responsible breeders and other legitimate authorities on animal welfare — smearing their reputations and wrongly slandering them by using terms like “puppy mill.” They propagate an inaccurate stigma against prospective puppy owners who make an informed choice to get a four-legged family member from responsible sources.
Contrary to the caricature advocacy groups present in the media, there are countless responsible breeders across the nation. Just as with reputable rescues and shelters, those breeders are genuine dog lovers who spend every day providing compassionate care for dogs. Being a responsible breeder takes hard work and attention. And, unlike unlicensed shelters and rescues, responsible breeders of scale are licensed and regulated by the government. Responsible breeders are also the foremost experts in the breeds they raise and providers of humane living environments to not only puppies, but their parents as well.
The breeder vs. shelter vs. rescue debate must end. Now. It’s a petty, counterproductive and dangerous fight among people who share a love and commitment to the humane treatment of dogs. It’s time to welcome responsible breeders — who love dogs and have more incentive than any other group to ensure substandard breeders cease to exist — to the fight.
And to prevent another good bill from becoming problematic, we need to stop using catchy but misleading taglines like “Adopt, Don’t Shop.” Instead we must take a “pro-dog” approach, join together and support legislation to protect the dogs we love based on facts and common sense.
Greg Liberman is CEO of PuppySpot.com, a trusted service that connects dog lovers with responsible breeders nationwide.
If you would like to write an op-ed for the Washington Examiner, please read our guidelines on submissions.
