Pet Industry News Current Issue Exclusives Classified Ads Marketplaces Industry People & Profiles Pet Industry Resource Center
11:22 PM   April 17, 2015
Click Here to Subscribe
Subscriber Services
Subscriber Services
How many of your customers ask about the safety of the food and treats they buy?
Click Here for Complete Breed & Species Profiles
Bookmark and Share

USDA Proposal Could Regulate Online Pet Sales

Posted: May 10, 2012, 8:25 p.m. EDT

UPDATE: The USDA published its proposed regulation in today’s (May 16, 2012) Federal Register and will accept comments on its proposed changes through July 16, 2012.

In an effort to protect animals sold over the Internet, the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) today proposed changing its definition of “retail pet store” to cover only those stores in which each and every pet sold was sold to someone who visited the business in person.

The existing definition allowed some online and mail-order sellers of pets, primarily an estimated 1,500 dog breeders, to avoid meeting Animal Welfare Act (AWA) requirements by operating as a retail business and selling direct to the public.

The proposed rule would remove the retail pet store exemption from any brick-and-mortar pet stores that sell any animals via the Internet, phone or mail because APHIS wants to ensure all animals sold retail are monitored by it or the public. A store could presumably keep its mail-order animals away from public scrutiny.

Online pet sales
The AWA requirements include identification of animals, recordkeeping, facilities and operations standards(including space, structure, and construction; waste disposal; heating ventilation; lighting; and interior surface requirements); animal health and husbandry standards (veterinary care; sanitation; feeding, watering, and separation of animals); and transportation standards (enclosures, care of animals in transit, etc.).

Retail pet stores have been exempt from the AWA under the premise that the public visits the facilities and observes the animals prior to purchase to ensure the animals were cared for in a humane and healthy way, according to the USDA. However, the definition of retail pet store was written in 1971, prior to the advent of the Internet and online sales.

“This proposed change is aimed at modernizing our regulations to require individuals who sell animals directly to the public to meet basic care and feeding as required by the Animal Welfare Act,” said Rebecca Blue, deputy under secretary for marketing and regulatory programs for the USDA. “By revising the definition of retail pet store to be better suited to today’s marketplace, we will improve the welfare of pets sold to consumers via online, phone- and mail-based businesses.”

The USDA contends that there is no assurance that animals sold at retail for use as pets are monitored for health and humane treatment nationwide without public oversight or licensing and inspections by APHIS.
The USDA expects the proposed regulation to be published in the Federal Register within a week, at which time the public would have 60 days to comment on the proposal.

Specifically, the proposed definition reads, “Retail pet store means a place of business or residence that each buyer physically enters in order to personally observe the animals available for sale prior to purchase and/or to take custody of the animals after purchase, and where only the following animals are sold or offered for sale, at retail, for use as pets: Dogs, cats, rabbits, guinea pigs, hamsters, gerbils, rats, mice, gophers, chinchilla, domestic ferrets, domestic farm animals, birds, and coldblooded species…”

The USDA estimates about 1,500 dog breeders, and very few breeders of other animals, could be affected by the rule change. The cost of those facilities to come into compliance would be between $2.2 million and $5.5 million, according to government estimates. Individual facility costs would average about $1,500 to $3,700 per facility, including licensing fees, animal identification costs, and expenses to bring facilities into compliance (estimates based on non-compliance rates of breeders in pre-licensing inspections in 2010. For example, the USDA estimates 237 of the estimated 1,500 breeders would need to improve their veterinary care, which would cost between $531,000 and $1.16 million combined.

The proposal would also increase the number of breeding females, from three to four, a person could maintain before requiring a license. This would allow the USDA to devote its limited enforcement efforts at larger facilities, which it deems more likely to be in noncompliance with the AWA regulations. APHIS considers facilities with four or fewer breeding females to be “low-risk” facilities.

APHIS estimates this would reduce the number of regulated Class A licensees (breeders) by 31 percent or 638 licensees from the current 2,064 licensees.

The agency also speculates that the proposal would address a competitive disadvantage that retail breeders who adhere to AWA regulations have compared to those retail breeders that lower their costs by not adhering to those standards.

The proposal also would exempt breeders of any animal other than wild or exotic animals, dogs, or cats, from the regulations if they earn gross income less than $500 from selling any covered animals. Currently the $500 limit applies only to animals sold to research facilities, exhibitors, dealers or pet stores.


 Give us your opinion on
USDA Proposal Could Regulate Online Pet Sales

Submit a Comment

Industry Professional Site: Comments from non-industry professionals will be removed.

Reader Comments
Animal breeding should be illegal period - Yes I know you support your family doing it, but at what cost? Breeding contributes to a million other problems - the standards are low and not enforced... inbreeding causes illness - better leave animals to work it out without us -humans are clueless
pea, montreal, MN
Posted: 11/5/2012 11:04:54 AM
A breeder can have more than 3 intact female and not be breeding them. While this may have been written with good intention, this regulation with strangle small breeders both good and bad! I don't know about the other people out there, but I like the option of having a well bred puppy and I don't think I should be forced to choose a popular dog because I can't afford to fly or drive out to get my puppy from the breeder.
Jen, Manchester, NH
Posted: 6/12/2012 7:57:17 AM
Any facility that is breeding enough animals to be registered with the USDA and fall under these regulations is not a "Hobby Breeder". These regulations help animals, period. Who cares if a backyard breeder/puppy mill has to stop breeding? I do--I jump for joy each time one of these poorly run places is "forced" out of business by regulations. Keep up the good work, USDA!
Sonya, Austin, TX
Posted: 5/19/2012 9:08:05 AM
This will hurt all hobby breeders. They are not a retail store. Everyone needs to vote this down with letters,faxes,etc. As well as vote out any politician that votes for such controls. There are bad apples in any business but this will hurt more quality breeders than bad ones and it is NOT fair.
Trish, Charlotte, NC
Posted: 5/18/2012 10:49:58 AM
View Current Comments

Healthy Puppy
Buy Now
Grooming Your Dog
Buy Now
House-training Your Dog
Buy Now
Copyright ©  PPN, LLC. All rights reserved.