Banning Pet Sales

When Mike Ricci wanted to buy his daughter a puppy, he discovered that in his state, “There were pet stores but none that sell puppies (or kittens).”

Ricci, being president of Stossel TV, investigated.

He discovered that eight states now ban retail sales of dogs, cats and rabbits. Animal activists want the bans extended to all states.

They say this is needed to save animals (and protect pet buyers) from abusive puppy mills — places that breed animals over and over, often resulting in inbred and unhealthy puppies.

The activists tell people: buy only from “responsible breeders.”

But how does one know who that is?

“Every site says ‘this is the best breeder … ethically sourced. Treated well,'” says Ricci in this week’s video.

“They say, ‘Don’t trust the pet stores!’ But am I supposed to be able to figure out from a website which breeder is great?”

Small pet stores “are the experts,” says Alyssa Miller-Hurley. She lobbies for them and says most don’t sell abused puppies. “Business owners know that you can’t survive if you’re providing a bad product.”

Good point, says Ricci. “Had there been a pet store in my town, I could have gone there and complained, ‘Hey, why’d you sell me a bad dog?’ I would tell my friends, ‘This pet store sells bad dogs! Don’t go there.’ That store’s going to close.”

Not so, replies Brian Hackett of the Associated Humane Societies. “Just because they’re still in business doesn’t mean they’re operating humanely.”

“So just ban all sales?” I ask.

“Every pet store ordinance or legislation I’ve worked on,” he says, “has overwhelming support from pro-business Republicans and left liberals.”

Of course they do. Both parties like pleasing activist groups, especially ones that give money to politicians, and also run dramatic TV ads showing abuse.

But what about the owners of pet stores forced out of business?

Hackett says, “They don’t have to sell puppies.”

They don’t have to sell puppies?

Chains like PetSmart and Petco survive doing that, but many pet stores rely on selling dogs and cats. After all, they’re pet stores.

After California banned sales, say pet store advocates, 95% of the impacted stores went out of business.

Yet the “ban pet stores” campaign is winning. More states will probably ban pet sales.

But how often does banning things solve a problem?

Animal activists say the bans are the only way to get rid of abusive puppy mills.

But Miller-Hurley points out, “A decade ago, they said there were over 10,000 puppy mills within the United States. Since then, eight states and hundreds of localities have passed these retail sales bans.”

The result? They still say there are 10,000 mills.

So “by their own measurements, these bans aren’t successful,” she continues. “What they are successful at is fundraising … they aren’t actually actively engaged in any real animal care.”

They aren’t?

I thought the ASPCA and humane societies run animal shelters!

But they rarely do.

The ASPCA collects more than $300 million in donations but gives only 2% of that to shelters. Most of its money goes for advertising and salaries. Its CEO pays himself $1,203,267.

Because New York state bans pet store sales, Ricci ended up driving more than 100 miles to a breeder in Pennsylvania. He’s happy with his puppy but has no idea if the breeder treats dogs humanely. He was shown medical records but asks, “How do I know if they were legitimate? They are the first dog medical records I’ve ever seen.”

I agree with his conclusion: Pet store bans do more harm than good.

“There’s already laws against animal abuse and neglect. Enforce that. Don’t pass new laws.”

Banning things that people want rarely works. Prohibition was repealed because it created new problems. The same is already true for pet store sale bans.

After California banned pet store puppy sales, puppy scams surged by 350%.

“It is not up to the government to tell people where they can get their animal,” complains Miller-Hurley.

Unfortunately, state by state, that’s what politicians are doing.

Photo by SHAKEEL AHAMMED on Unsplash

4 thoughts on “Banning Pet Sales

  1. Puppy mills will continue because cutting out the middle man doesnt treat the problem, it just makes the puppy mills become the retailer. Im pretty sure if you peel back the layers what you will find that is driving the bans are activists that dont want people to be able to own pets, period…..people like PETA and those of that ilk

  2. Its fascinating how banning pet stores, which clearly drives 95% of them out of business, *somehow* doesnt seem to reduce the number of puppy mills. Maybe the mills are just getting better at hiding? While groups focused on fundraising instead of actual animal care seem to lead the charge, its amusing that some people still drive 100 miles for a puppy only to wonder if the breeder is legitimate. I suppose next theyll be telling us we need to ban cars because people can still get into accidents.

  3. Its fascinating how the debate here is less about animal welfare and more about whose TV ads are more dramatic. Banning pet stores solves nothing if humane societies then just become fundraising machines with fancy ads, doesnt it? And lets be real, telling small business owners they *dont have to sell puppies* when chains do is like telling a dieter they *dont have to eat* – it misses the point entirely. So, if the goal is truly better animals, maybe focusing on actual oversight instead of just closing stores is the way forward? Or maybe we just accept that puppy lovers will drive 100 miles for their furry friends, no matter the paperwork.

  4. Oh, the irony! Banning pet stores solves the *retail* problem, but the puppy mills just go underground like bad dogs running from humane societies. Its like trying to put out a fire by banning fire hoses – the fire just finds another way to burn! Meanwhile, the ASPCA collects millions but only shares a tiny sprinkle with actual shelters. Its the ultimate dog-and-pony show! And lets not forget the surge in puppy scams – apparently, restricting legal sources just breeds illegal ones. So, maybe instead of banning everything, we should just enforce the existing laws? Sounds like a plan simpler than teaching a cat to fetch!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *