Michigan Dog Law- SB 1503, Commercial Dog & Cat Breeder Act

This is just one bills currently making its way through the MI Legislature which can affect dog owners. I think it is important to start reviewing these and would like to point out a few things about this one.

Senate Bill 1503 is called the "Commercial Dog & Cat Breeder Act". It limits the number of animals a person can own for breeding purposes, allows the Dept. of Agriculture to create rules for the minimum standards of housing, care and handling, requires inspection for licensing, and requires sold pets to have health certificates, complete with very specific vaccinations. Violations can include a suspended or revoked license, $1,000 fine per violation, and a misdemeanor, even if a person is "about to engage" in a violation but hasn't done anything wrong.

Animal rights activists have been known to pass similar bills in other states, with the pet limit varying. 25 is a lower limit than we've seen elsewhere. So how big of a problem do we have with large kennels in MI? Do we really need more government interference to protect dogs and their owners, or future owners?

First, you should recognize that the "problem" isn't with the number of dogs they have or produce, regardless of what the animal rights activists would have you believe. Why isn't the number a problem? Because there is a market for puppies and adult dogs in MI and elsewhere, and because the great state of Michigan does not really have much of a "population problem" with dogs, either. So why define this law by limiting numbers?

"WHAT?! What about the "overpopulation problem"?!", you say. You would probably define that by the numbers of dogs euthanized or in shelters in our state, right? Well, I looked at the shelter intake and output numbers from 2004. This is the latest I have access to, as a whole of MI representation. If I understand the figures correctly, my estimates are thus:

In 2004, about 5.4% of MI's dogs entered the shelter system at some point for some reason. 54% of those left the shelter system alive. Very few (4%) were euthanized (2.2% of the entire state's dog population). Dogs that generally wait in the shelter system for return, rehoming, or euthanasia account for about 2.3% of MI's canine population.

While dog lovers like myself don't like to see any dog sitting in a shelter, 2% just doesn't seem like a huge problem to me, especially considering that most of them get into a home eventually. 2% (the number euthanized) generally represents the bottom-of-the-barrel dogs-- the unwanted, aggressive, very sick kind of dogs that most people just don't want and wouldn't want to invest in. Sure, I think we can do better, but take a stroll through your local shelter and tell me how many of those dogs are purebred dogs. True, many of the purebreds go to specialized adoption groups for their specific breed. But your tax dollars aren't covering their care, for the most part. And generally speaking, kennel license holders who are breeders aren't exactly pumping our shelters full of their unwanted puppies. The dogs that end up there are usually undersocialized, un-trained, and often ill-bred. There have always been, and always will be, some unwanted dogs.

Before you get upset with me, please understand that I have acquired several gems from shelters myself. One was found as a stray pup. Two were dropped off as pups by their original owners (owners of the momma bitch). One was entirely unwanted but grew into a worthy pet, the other was quite attractive but full of energy. All of them are great pets. Still, I know nothing of their heritage, health histories, etc., so there are sacrifices and risks with shelter dog adoptions.

So how many kennels do we have in MI? HSUS has been doing some figuring, so they'd know what kind of law they can push here in our state. Of the 1,067 kennels reviewed by February this year, 450 are "breeding facilities". Only 4% of those (17) had more than 49 dogs. Only two had been involved in prior cruelty cases. Most kennels had hunting dogs and sled dogs, two types which are pretty popular in our state.

While HSUS may wish to attack our right to own and breed dogs in this state, I just don't see it as a numbers "problem". So do we really need a new law?

Consider that the number of 25 is arbitrary. There were so few kennels with over 50 dogs, they figure they can lower the target number to get this law passed and effective (for their purpose). But that doesn't stop them from lowering that number again later on. A quality breeder with much fewer (or many more) dogs could find themselves with all kinds of fees and restrictions with the "minimum standard" requirements that quickly lose common sense foundations. We have seen this happen elsewhere. Suddenly, those license fees jump to thousands of dollars when the AR inspector finds multiple violations of kibble pieces on the floor or a pile of fresh poop in the kennel. A responsible breeder could end up facing a misdemeanor nightmare, or they could quit. Lots of them already have. And that's exactly what the AR's want.

Another requirement in this bill is that the puppies must have a CPV-2, CDV, CAV-2, and rabies vaccinations prior to sale. In other words, you can't buy your new pup until he's at least 4 months of age, and the seller has to keep him well beyond what experienced breeders and trainers all over the world have recommended for years. And it doesn't matter what vaccinations your veterinarian does or does not recommend for your dog. He has to get all of these down at a young age (this list could also get worse over time). Who is the government to decide this? A dog owner and vet. should have the say in that aspect of care.

Because this and similar laws decrease the number of breeders available, what's left is the "backyard breeder", regardless of how educated, experienced, and responsible that breeder is. Those people will continue to breed their dogs as they wish, but without the numbers, their experience level will not be as high. They won't be controlled by the government standards. What quality pets will be left for us to choose from?

How many intact dogs to you know, and how many of those are quality animals? While it's great to promote spay and neuter procedures for most pet dogs, for lots of reasons, have we gone too far? Are we starting a new age of social and legal restrictions against the very people we need to supply us with quality dogs?

When was the last time you shopped around for a "responsible breeder"? I have, over the last year or two, as I investigated several breeds to suit my particular needs. It is NOT that easy! You'd want to find them on the web, but HSUS says that websites advertising puppies are a problem, and many breeders ("responsible" or not) have gone underground to protect themselves. So you go to a breed club. But even then, it isn't easy to make contact with, visit, or meet breeders who care about the form and function of their dogs. I know because I've tried.

By the time you find a quality breeder with quality dogs, it seems the price of the animal goes up tremendously. The costs of raising quality dogs gets high enough as it is, without government interference, licensing and fines. This limits many families, who then find a cheaper pet of lower quality just to fill the void. But if quality breeders are put out of business by the extra expenses of government interference, lower quality dogs will be all we have access to.

We don't need a law like this in Michigan. Low-cost spay and neuter programs, community-wide focus on education for responsible pet ownership, and quality shelter programs are becoming more and more successful every day. We're seeing less animals in the shelters and on the euthanisation table than ever before (not more). And if people are really concerned about the quality of care dogs are receiving in larger operations, basic cruelty laws cover those issues already.

We don't need to let the HSUS outsiders influence our public opinion or our laws, and put undue restrictions on quality breeders. Tell your legislator to oppose SB1503.