Breeders skeptical of animal cruelty law

Area dog breeders and pet owners alike are concerned about the proposition of a new bill aimed at reducing animal cruelty.

The bill is intended to strengthen anti-animal cruelty laws and crack down on puppy mills, which are mass breeding facilities that produce puppies for sale in pet stores, over the Internet and directly to customers. But some breeders said they are worried the laws put in place to help are going to do more damage than good.

The bill, H.B. 1468, passed the Indiana House of Representatives last month with a landslide 81-14 vote and will now go before the Senate. If the Senate passes the bill, it will then be put before the governor, who will either sign the bill or veto it.

If passed, the bill would expand Indiana’s animal cruelty statute from just neglecting food and water to neglecting shelter and medical care. Also, anyone convicted of animal cruelty would no longer be allowed to own a pet.

The bill also cracks down on puppy mills by requiring them to give dogs ample exercise outside their cages and facilities, consistently clean the cages, and construct the cages to protect dogs from disease and injury and have sufficient heating, cooling and ventilation.

However, local breeders said they are concerned the bill is an attack on them.

Sharon Deerwester, a Bloomington dog breeder with about 30 years’ experience, is concerned about what could happen to her business under the new laws. Deerwester said she is worried about being labeled a pet dealer.

“It hurts hobby breeders because we would be considered dealers,” Deerwester said.

Deerwester said even if she breeds one dog only once a year, under the new bill she would still have to register as a pet dealer.

Puppy breeders also raised concerns about the standard conditions for where the dogs would be kept. One of those conditions is the temperature requirement – between 65 and 78 degrees Fahrenheit.

Deerwester said the temperature requirement does not consider all dogs. She added that her dogs have thick coats and love the snow and cold.

Keeping the temperature at the new requirement is not best for her dogs or some other dogs, she said.

Other residents are voicing their concerns about the bill as well.

Pat Robertson, an area dog owner, said she has issues with the way the bill is written.

“This bill seems to go by numbers,” Robertson said.

Robertson said she thinks just focusing on numbers does not really target the conditions.

The bill would allow breeders only 30 dogs for breeding. Robertson said she thinks if breeders are able to take care of more than 30 dogs and maintain the proper conditions, they should be allowed to do so.

Robertson also said the bill could actually cause negative effects, such as owners losing their dogs.

“My idea of protecting my dog is defeating this bill,” Robertson said.

If passed, the bill would also target the conditions found in puppy mills. Robertson said there is no direct definition of what a puppy mill is, but there are places out there with horrible conditions.

The bill is not as simple as it seems, she said, adding that current anti-cruelty laws are good enough if taken seriously.

“It seems to me the laws are already well in place,” Robertson said. “They just need more enforcement.”

Deerwester said she thinks the bill is just another attack from “animal activists” who just want to shut down all breeders in Indiana.

Even if the bill is reworked so it does not target private breeders, she said activists will keep coming back until all breeders are shut down.

Sarah Hayes, CEO of the Monroe County Humane Association, said those “activists” have nothing to do with it.

It’s important to look at the bill’s definition of a “pet dealer,” Hayes said. She said the bill requires dealers to keep a two-year log of animals produced and sold as well as veterinary records of all animals.

Breeders must also be able to show law enforcement officers their logs and prove the dogs are being provided proper care, she said, adding that she hopes the term “pet dealer” will no longer have a negative connotation.

“If you are a reputable breeder, you should have no issue with this bill,” Hayes said.