Local laws aimed at curbing puppy-mill abuses should stand in Ohio: editorial


According to the Humane Society of the U.S., more than 250 dogs were rescued in August 2012 from this puppy mill in Shelby, Ohio. The Ohio Senate last week passed a bill that would prohibit Ohio communities from imposing dog-purchase requirements on local pet stores aimed at curbing purchases from puppy mills.

(Paul Vernon, Special for HSUS, PD file, 2012)

Localities should be able to regulate pet stores more strictly than the state, especially when state law is so woefully behind the times. But Ohio lawmakers don't see it that way.

Remaining on the Ohio House's menu when it returns in November is Senate Bill 331, which would forbid cities and villages from regulating pet store sales of dogs. Two cities that do that now are Toledo (since 2013) and Grove City, the Columbus suburb, whose ordinance takes effect Jan. 1. The cities' aims: to fight so-called puppy mills - intensive breeders of puppies, raised in sometimes sordid conditions.

What's at issue with the bill?

SB 331, sponsored by state Sen. Bob Peterson, a Republican from Fayette County, southwest of Columbus, would replace local regulation with proposed statewide regulations.

That sounds good, but animal advocates say the rules are weak and that pre-empting localities from being able to pass their own pet-store ordinances forecloses a needed safeguard.

Backers and opponents of SB 331:

Key backer: Petland, the Chillicothe-based chain, founded in 1967, which employs more than 500 Ohioans and has nearly a score of Ohio stores. Petland doesn't have a Toledo store but built one in Grove City before that city passed its pet-store ordinance.

About our editorials

Editorials express the view of the





Among those opposed to the bill are the Ohio Municipal League and the Humane Society of the United States.

Where the bill stands:

The Ohio Senate passed SB 331 by a largely party-line vote of 21-11 on May 25 and it is now pending in the Ohio House.

What do the Toledo and Grove City ordinances do?

Both ordinances limit where a pet store may obtain dogs and cats. Grove City's, for example, would let stores sell only dogs and cats obtained from an animal rescue shelter, or a humane society. Toledo's is similar, but grandfathered existing pet stores. Grove City's doesn't.

How SB 331 would change that:

Peterson's bill would let retailers sell dogs from a "qualified breeder" (an entity that isn't a "high-volume breeder") - but also from a high-volume breeder if it's licensed by the U.S. Agriculture Department or a state. Stores couldn't, however, obtain dogs from breeders who'd violated the Animal Welfare Act within certain time spans. (Ohio law defines a high-volume breeder as an entity that produces at least nine litters of puppies a year and sells 60 or more adult dogs or puppies a year.)

What should happen:

It's hard to argue that Petland doesn't have a beef with Grove City. But the city's ordinance doesn't take effect for almost seven months. That allows time to resolve the matter locally, and makes SB 331 - yet another assault on home rule in Ohio - unnecessary and untimely. The bill should not be taken up in the fall.