Indiana Senate sends controversial ‘puppy mill’ bill back to the House

HB 1412, authored by Rep. Beau Baird, R-Greencastle, provides new regulations for the retail sale of dogs. Pet stores, animal care facilities and animal rescue operations would be required to register with the Board of Animal Health. Other new regulations would include mandatory disclosures and warranties for retail pet stores selling dogs and a random inspection program for commercial dog breeders, commercial dog brokers and retail pet stores. If passed, the new rules would begin July 1, 2025.

Opponents of the bill fear HB 1412 would limit local regulation of dog breeders and pet stores.

In a Senate session Monday, Sen. Blake Doriot, R-Elkhart, said provisions of the bill are being misunderstood. Rather than limiting local regulations, he said the bill increases breeding standards. Dogs will have to be bred according to the canine care certifications by Purdue University.

He mentioned his family’s generational experience breeding and showing dogs and said he “would not impune” his and his family’s reputation as “man’s best friend.”

“House Bill 1412 is not a puppy mill bill. The reason I know this is because my family history has a lot to do with dogs,” he said.

In puppy mills, dog breeders sell puppies for profit, mother dogs breed until they are no longer physically able to, and dog are raised in cruel living conditions.

Many animal welfare organizations have spoken out against House Bill 1412 because it will remove local ordinances prohibiting the sale of dogs at pet stores, which opponents have said will discourage from adopting shelter animals. Others claim the bill provides no guarantee that funding or support will be given to help the Indiana Board of Animal Health to handle the expected increase in monitoring breeders and facilities.

Sen. Fady Qaddoura, D-Indianapolis, said the language in the bill reflects a divide between rural, urban and suburban communities.

“If we preserve the law the way that it is today, then let local communities control,” Qaddoura said. “If you live in a community that wants to do this, they can do it. If you live in Columbus, Indiana, and you don’t want to outsource puppies from puppy mills, they will ban it.”

He said it’s not a commerce argument, it’s a local control argument.

Social media posts from opponents of the bill also expressed concerns with losing local control and urged people to “take action” by calling and emailing legislators. The Humane Society of the United States – Indiana posted on its social media feed encouraging people to stop the passing of  “this dangerous bill that protects puppy mills by allowing pet stores to continue sourcing from inhumane commercial breeders. The bill also voids 21 local ordinances that regulate the sale of cats and dogs in Indiana communities.”

Jill Ellis, executive director of Hoosier Fix, a nonprofit focused on providing low- to no-cost spay, neuter and vaccines for cats and dogs in Indianapolis and surrounding areas, opposes the bill.

“HB 1412 is taking away local control to regulate what is being sold in pet stores in places like Indianapolis and Carmel. Indianapolis is overflowing with dogs who need homes,” said Ellis.

She said there aren’t enough inspectors in the state to go out to the facilities, and there’s no money involved in the bill to add additional people.

Candace Croney, director for Center for Animal Welfare Science at Purdue University who created the standards for Canine Care Certified, a voluntary program addressing the health and overall welfare of dogs in the care of breeders, took no position on the bill.

Instead she highlighted the complexities of regulating dog breeders in the U.S. and the demand for dogs exceeding the supply in shelters.

“The data shows the problem is the U.S. public wants choices on where they can get dogs from because there’s a supply and demand imbalance,” Croney told The Statehouse File. “If people are told they can only get dogs from a shelter or rescue, but they decide for whatever reason they do not want a dog from that source, they go and find other places to get dogs, some of which are not regulated at all. Some people go to the internet.”

In Doriot’s closing remarks, he said the Indiana General Assembly is “not breaking new ground” as other places have passed similar bills.

In the end, the bill passed the Senate 31-18. Nine of the 18 nays came from Republicans, and no Democrats voted for the bill to pass.

Because the Senate committee that heard the bill opted to amend it, those changes must be approved by the House Chamber, either through a concurrence vote or through a conference committee, according to The Indiana Capital Chronicle.