Consumer Alert: APHIS 2011-0003
Currently we are opposing the APHIS 2011-0003 proposed rule which would bring nearly all animal breeders under Animal Welfare Act requirements, forcing animals to be raised in commercial and laboratory style facilities instead of in home and family farm settings.
While we have nothing against commercial and laboratory facilities, we do not feel that people should be limited to ONLY this method of raising animals. We believe people should have the freedom to choose any humane method of raising animals rather than being limited to one particular style by federal mandate, and that consumers should have the right to choose how they want their pets raised.
This rule would apply to "Dogs, cats, rabbits, guinea pigs, hamsters, gerbils, rats, mice, gophers, chinchilla, domestic ferrets, domestic farm animals, birds, and cold-blooded species."
In order to be exempt, people would need to: (1) Have all pet sales, adoptions, etc. take place so that the buyer or adopter physically enters the location where the animals were raised. This would force breeders and rescues to compromise biosecurity and risk their animals' and family's safety by allowing any stranger who claims to be interested in obtaining an animal into their family home, foster homes, farms, etc.
** Update: APHIS is now saying that "face to face" retail pet sales will be exempt even if they take place away from the seller's home/business. However, there is no indication that the text of the actual rule will be changed to reflect this. Instead, APHIS is saying that they plan to interpret the phrase "place of business" to mean any place where the seller is present during the transaction. Many people are concerned that this may not hold up in a court of law, and that a promise not to interpret the law as it is written carries little or no real weight since it disagrees with a plain reading of the text of the rule.**
or (2) Maintain 4 or fewer breedable "female dogs, cats, and/or small exotic or wild mammals" and sell ONLY these animals born and raised on their premises. This is a particular problem for people who show animals, as they must be unaltered for showing even though most are not actively being bred. This exemption at this point seems to apply only to the listed species, and will most likely be enforced as a combined total of all animals of these types (i.e. one dog, two cats and a hedgehog makes 4 intact females, even if they aren't being bred). It applies to animals being housed by a person even if it is not their animal (i.e. a rescue dog being fostered) and animals co-owned by the person, even if they are housed somewhere else.
** The licensing requirements for animals other than dogs, cats and exotic/wild animals do not kick in until/unless the breeder grosses more than $500 in sales of AWA-regulated animals over the course of a year. **
There are some other exemptions listed in the Animal Welfare Act:
§2132. Definitions
(g) The term “animal” means any live or dead dog, cat, monkey (nonhuman primate mammal), guinea pig, hamster, rabbit, or such other warm-blooded animal, as the Secretary may determine is being used, or is intended for use, for research, testing, experimentation, or exhibition purposes, or as a pet; but such term excludes (1) birds, rats of the genus Rattus, and mice of the genus Mus, bred for use in research, (2) horses not used for research purposes, and (3) other farm animals, such as, but not limited to livestock or poultry, used or intended for use as food or fiber, or livestock or poultry used or intended for use for improving animal nutrition, breeding, management, or production efficiency, or for improving the quality of food or fiber. With respect to a dog, the term means all dogs including those used for hunting, security, or breeding purposes;
The wording of the proposed APHIS rule and what people are being told by APHIS/USDA over the phone disagrees with existing AWA law in several ways. First, several people have been told by USDA that show animals and breeding stock for animals such as meat rabbits could be considered pets for purposes of this rule. Secondly, the rule is altering several paragraphs of the law, in addition to adding species that were previously not defined as animals under AWA definitions, such as cold-blooded species. The rule is poorly written and needs to be clarified, or better yet thrown out.
On its face, the way it is written, if a farmer or breeder sells even one animal as a "pet" in a situation where the buyer does not come to their home, farm or place of business, they must become USDA licensed. A farmer selling livestock animals for purposes like a petting zoo, goats eating brush, etc. (situations not clearly related to food and fiber production) could potentially come under the impact of this rule.
Many may not realize that the federal Animal Welfare Act Regulations require that animals be raised in cages and husbandry methods that meet standards intended for laboratories and large commercial facilities. For instance, "The floors and walls of indoor housing facilities, and any other surfaces in contact with the animals, must be impervious to moisture." Animal Welfare Act Standards; Part 3, Subpart A, Section 3.2 (d)
See our blog post, Why not just apply for a USDA license? for a fuller understanding of what being USDA licensed involves.
You may read the entire text of the proposed USDA rule and submit public comments here. Please note that it does make changes to several paragraphs in the law that clarify exemptions and definitions.
Note: Some of our public awareness ads also refer to PUPS. PUPS is a piece of legislation that would force more dog breeders to become USDA licensed and conform to Animal Welfare Act Standards. AWA Standards require commercial facilities with no permeable surfaces, no other animals in the home with puppies, and a number of other regulations which would require puppies to be raised in cages in a sterile laboratory-style setting instead of being raised and socialized in home and family settings. PUPS applies only to dogs, in contrast to APHIS 2011-0003 which covers many other species as well.
While we have nothing against commercial and laboratory facilities, we do not feel that people should be limited to ONLY this method of raising animals. We believe people should have the freedom to choose any humane method of raising animals rather than being limited to one particular style by federal mandate, and that consumers should have the right to choose how they want their pets raised.
This rule would apply to "Dogs, cats, rabbits, guinea pigs, hamsters, gerbils, rats, mice, gophers, chinchilla, domestic ferrets, domestic farm animals, birds, and cold-blooded species."
In order to be exempt, people would need to: (1) Have all pet sales, adoptions, etc. take place so that the buyer or adopter physically enters the location where the animals were raised. This would force breeders and rescues to compromise biosecurity and risk their animals' and family's safety by allowing any stranger who claims to be interested in obtaining an animal into their family home, foster homes, farms, etc.
** Update: APHIS is now saying that "face to face" retail pet sales will be exempt even if they take place away from the seller's home/business. However, there is no indication that the text of the actual rule will be changed to reflect this. Instead, APHIS is saying that they plan to interpret the phrase "place of business" to mean any place where the seller is present during the transaction. Many people are concerned that this may not hold up in a court of law, and that a promise not to interpret the law as it is written carries little or no real weight since it disagrees with a plain reading of the text of the rule.**
or (2) Maintain 4 or fewer breedable "female dogs, cats, and/or small exotic or wild mammals" and sell ONLY these animals born and raised on their premises. This is a particular problem for people who show animals, as they must be unaltered for showing even though most are not actively being bred. This exemption at this point seems to apply only to the listed species, and will most likely be enforced as a combined total of all animals of these types (i.e. one dog, two cats and a hedgehog makes 4 intact females, even if they aren't being bred). It applies to animals being housed by a person even if it is not their animal (i.e. a rescue dog being fostered) and animals co-owned by the person, even if they are housed somewhere else.
** The licensing requirements for animals other than dogs, cats and exotic/wild animals do not kick in until/unless the breeder grosses more than $500 in sales of AWA-regulated animals over the course of a year. **
There are some other exemptions listed in the Animal Welfare Act:
§2132. Definitions
(g) The term “animal” means any live or dead dog, cat, monkey (nonhuman primate mammal), guinea pig, hamster, rabbit, or such other warm-blooded animal, as the Secretary may determine is being used, or is intended for use, for research, testing, experimentation, or exhibition purposes, or as a pet; but such term excludes (1) birds, rats of the genus Rattus, and mice of the genus Mus, bred for use in research, (2) horses not used for research purposes, and (3) other farm animals, such as, but not limited to livestock or poultry, used or intended for use as food or fiber, or livestock or poultry used or intended for use for improving animal nutrition, breeding, management, or production efficiency, or for improving the quality of food or fiber. With respect to a dog, the term means all dogs including those used for hunting, security, or breeding purposes;
The wording of the proposed APHIS rule and what people are being told by APHIS/USDA over the phone disagrees with existing AWA law in several ways. First, several people have been told by USDA that show animals and breeding stock for animals such as meat rabbits could be considered pets for purposes of this rule. Secondly, the rule is altering several paragraphs of the law, in addition to adding species that were previously not defined as animals under AWA definitions, such as cold-blooded species. The rule is poorly written and needs to be clarified, or better yet thrown out.
On its face, the way it is written, if a farmer or breeder sells even one animal as a "pet" in a situation where the buyer does not come to their home, farm or place of business, they must become USDA licensed. A farmer selling livestock animals for purposes like a petting zoo, goats eating brush, etc. (situations not clearly related to food and fiber production) could potentially come under the impact of this rule.
Many may not realize that the federal Animal Welfare Act Regulations require that animals be raised in cages and husbandry methods that meet standards intended for laboratories and large commercial facilities. For instance, "The floors and walls of indoor housing facilities, and any other surfaces in contact with the animals, must be impervious to moisture." Animal Welfare Act Standards; Part 3, Subpart A, Section 3.2 (d)
See our blog post, Why not just apply for a USDA license? for a fuller understanding of what being USDA licensed involves.
You may read the entire text of the proposed USDA rule and submit public comments here. Please note that it does make changes to several paragraphs in the law that clarify exemptions and definitions.
Note: Some of our public awareness ads also refer to PUPS. PUPS is a piece of legislation that would force more dog breeders to become USDA licensed and conform to Animal Welfare Act Standards. AWA Standards require commercial facilities with no permeable surfaces, no other animals in the home with puppies, and a number of other regulations which would require puppies to be raised in cages in a sterile laboratory-style setting instead of being raised and socialized in home and family settings. PUPS applies only to dogs, in contrast to APHIS 2011-0003 which covers many other species as well.