Legislative Alerts

Federal
PAWS a bill that fundamentally changes the Animal Welfare Act-OPPOSE it as it will require hobby rabbit breeders to become USDA licensed for selling a small number of rabbits, or even just one as a pet or breeding stock

VA: SB55 will regulate rabbit breeders and subject you to a $150 per year license as well as require you to purchase a local business license

2004 NY breeder licensing bill successfully opposed!

AP: ALF Raids Hurting Animals	National Animal Interest Alliance	Americans For Medical Progress Educational Foundation Important facts about HSUS & other Animal Rights groups
American Kennel Club: Legislative updates and information about what to do!	National Pet Alliance: San Mateo County Pet Overpopulation Ordinance A Legislative Failure	Animal People: AHA Says 12 Million wanted to discredit pet breeders
AP: Can We Outlaw Overpopulation?	NPA: Why Not Coercive Legislation?	Animal People: Instead of Breeding Bans
SFSPCA Position Statement: Cat Licensing Analysis of Claims	Houston Animal Welfare Coalition Site: Can't happen to you? This links to the Houston bill introduced in 1995 that would have required rabbit breeders and other animal breeders to be licensed as well as other restrictions!	American Dog Owners Association
Animal Industry Foundation	USDA/APHIS page, for Breeders read about Animal Welfare Act and if you need a license	Cap WEB: Guide to US Congress
Pet Owners Rights Site Info on your rights!	AP: Can We Learn From Detroit	AP: Do Purebreds Have More Genetic Problems?
AP: Don't Call Me A Pimp- ABout the Attitudes of Animal Activists	Read the Current Federal Laws Here	Internet Law Library	The Electronic Activist: Media & Gov. Info Links
One Voice Unlimited	Project Smart Vote	Government Resources on the Web
Political Resources Home Page	US Newspapers Link	Law.com
Legislative Action Center	Guidestar info on Chairitable Organizations includes some rabbit orgs.	AKC site Cripple Creek Success Story-Anti-breeding legislation successfully defeated
Animal Law-Law Journal foucsed on animals	Small Claims Court Kit	Small Business Litigation Info
Law Talk	Business Law Structures & Issues	Section of Business law Publications Catalog	Planet Feedback-site to help you write to companies

Breeder Licensing: The New Animal Rights Weapon

"The activists fought for large license fees for intact animals and permits for each breeding with emotional diatribes against breeders."-From "Overpopulation?" on the National Animal Interest Alliance web site. Fund For Animals publishes a how to manual on passing mandatory spay/neuter legislation called "Killing the Crisis Not the Animal". It contains everything you need to know from gathering and analyzing overpopulation statistics to lobbying legislators and winning over the media. I was told by a cat fancier that other AR groups also have similar material. The legislation is introduced in order to prevent the countless and needless deaths of millions of unwanted animals. Who wouldn't want to help stop abandonment of animals? And that is where the ARAs gather support for their bills.

According to FFA's booklet "The Fund has embarked on an aggressive program to pass legislation regulating the breeding of dogs and cats. The legislation requires animal guardians to spay and neuter their companions or apply for a breeding permit. Extreme? Not when you consider how we have chosen to 'solve' the problem to date. Killing the surplus is extreme- not regulating the breeding." San Mateo county, CA can go down in history as the first area to fall to the animal rightists. In 1991 a law was passed requiring cats to be licensed, higher impound fees to reclaim an unaltered animal, and people required to obtain a breeding permit if they want to breed their cats or dogs, the 6 month breeding moratorium was defeated. The FFA winter 1998 Spay/Neuter Legislation Bulletin lists all the animal population control ordinances passed in the US, I will list those requiring a breeding license and year passed: Albuquerque NM 1994, Aurora CO 1993, Belmont CA 1994, Camden NJ 1996, Denver CO 1993, Fort Wayne IN 1990, King County WA 1992, Lake Elsinore CA 1996, Marina CA 1994, McKinley county NM 1992, Montgomery county MD 1992, Muscatine IA 1995, Pacific Grove CA 1992, Rock Island IL 1993, Ruidoso NM 1992, San Mateo City CA 1995, Santa Cruz CA 1994, Visalia CA 1994. In addition Georgia requires breeders (includes rabbits) to pay $50 for an annual permit and Houston TX introduced a breeder licensing bill covering rabbits as well as other animals in 1995 (it was defeated).

Legislators, shelters, the general public, and even breeders fall for the ARAs lies and half truths about overpopulation since no one wants to see animals abandoned and killed. The Peninsula Humane Society helped get the San Mateo ordinance passed by using the media. They invited reporters out to film the euthanasia of a puppy and kitten, which was run on the evening news. They also published an ad showing 3 barrels full of dead cats with the caption "This is one HELL of a job. And we couldn't do it without you." These emotional displays produced a public out cry and enabled the ordinance to pass despite strong breeder opposition.

Are breeder permits the direction to go to solve the "overpopulation" problem? It's one possible direction, but consider the price, the price for our freedom to pursue hobby breeding is some irresponsible breeders. The price for licensing may not be easily seen before it is implemented but it could serve as the ARAs first step to outlawing breeding. Keep in mind if you need a license government can track you and further regulate how you conduct your hobby. According to a recent NAIA article, "Activists are patient; they may back moderate legislation in hopes of adding amendments later or influencing the rules written to implement the law."

The price in monetary terms is easier to examine. Camden NJ requires a licensing fee of $500 annually for each intact animal. The other ordinances FFA lists fees for require anything between $25-$100 yearly. It may not seem like much to pay however nowhere do the ordinances state the fees can't be increased. Other proposed ordinances I've read have stated the breeder must also file with their Tax and Equalization board to collect and report sales tax on the animals they sell. Rabbits are a hobby for me because I do not want to run a business with all the permits and reporting requirements that entails. Think carefully about the costs of these bills before you decide to support them!

The big question is how will licensing of breeders solve abandonment of companion animals, rabbits included. Should we regulate breeding? The Animal Welfare Act already requires licensing of commercial breeders, $500 in gross sales is the limit for a hobby breeder exemption. ARAs estimate 25% of dogs in shelters are purebreeds so it doesn't look like the hobby breeders are to blame, why should they be regulated. The CFA estimates purebred cats are only 5-8% of the shelter population. Unfortunately rabbit population information is not known so we can't determine how many from hobby breeders are abandoned. I have heard from shelter workers that hobby rabbit breeders are not the problem. Theoretically making spay/neuter mandatory should decrease abandoned animals but experience suggests it will not.

The NPA has closely examined the effects of the San Mateo county law and determined that the first year the ordinance was in effect euthanasia rates actually increased and have not reached the previous low levels prior to the passage of the ordinance. (Link to this study listed on Links Page) It was determined that the preceding 25 years showed a downward trend in euthanasia and cities that did not adopt the law continued to see numbers decrease. In addition no breeding permits were issued to cat breeders and a low number were issued for dog breeders. This is obviously evidence that restrictive breeding ordinances do not solve overpopulation. Also unsettling is that there is a very low number of breeders suggesting again that they are not the cause of the "overpopulation crisis". Is it fair that this small group is regulated?

If you examine the licensing requirements they do not have any elements that would deter abandonment. Most state basic guidelines for proper care including enclosure size minimums, feeding and watering, and veterinary care. These are not items that would prevent a pet owner from abandoning or accidentally breeding their pet. There are no requirements for screening perspective owners or for providing education. A recent scientific study presented at a NAIA Purebred Rescue Symposium identified two risk factors for pet abandonment, ignorance of normal pet behavior and low acquisition costs. Breeder licensing does not address those two factors therefore it is uneffective in preventing abandonment.

Hobby breeders are not the cause of companion animal overpopulation therefore we should not be regulated. Generally fanciers are the ones responsible for education and promotion of responsible pet ownership. It is an infringement of our rights to impose restrictive legislation that ultimately fails to address the true causes of overpopulation or solves it. Furthermore this infringement will only cause dedicated fanciers to leave the hobby and also their role in educating pet owners. It is important for breeders as a group to work towards reducing rabbit abandonment and gathering reliable statistics about it so we can effectively oppose the new animal rights weapon. And most importantly we must become active protectors of our rights. If you are not already, start monitoring local government and be ready to act against restrictive breeding ordinances. Also don't forget state and federal governemt. There are many sources of information about pending bills targeting animals. Be sure to follow the links listed on our page to NAIA, ASPCA, AKC, and CFA to monitor what is happening nationwide in regard to legislation. Every fancier is needed to fight the threat of restrcitive breeding legislation, a solution to "overpopulation" proven to be a failure.

What's Wrong With Breeder Licensing?

Based on answers from many pet owners on the Rabbit Education Society Pet Owner survey we see that there is a misunderstanding about what breeder licensing could accomplish. Too many pet owners think that it will cure all the ills in the rabbit world and ensure only responsible breeders are breeding. Others misunderstand that it would not negatively affect the responsible breeder and help to improve rabbits. The facts are breeder licensing will not accomplish any of the former goals and it would make life very difficult for responsible breeders without stopping irresponsible breeders. Let's examine why.

First what exactly is breeder licensing? It is requiring anyone who breeds an animal to obtain a license, failure to do so would result in a misdemeanor or felony. Breeder licensing is legislation that animal rights activists have created to help achieve their goal to end all companion animal breeding. Since the early 1990s dog and cat breeders have been faced with breeder licensing nationwide. In most ordinances there is a mandatory requirement that all animals must be spayed or neutered otherwise you are required to obtain a breeding license. Unfortunately in order to write a law forcing pet owners to spay/neuter you also need to make an allowance for people who want to breed their animals, hence the licensing. The average breeder licensing ordinance requires adequate housing, provision of food and water, medical care, sanitation, and record keeping. There are also inspection requirements.

The basic requirements of food, water, housing, medical care, and sanitation are already the basis of animal cruelty laws and therefore redundant. If there are problems with animal abuse and neglect it is because your animal control officer isn't doing their job. In addition the Animal Welfare Act, a federal law, covers the non-hobby breeder and is very specific as to what care is required. Better enforcement of existing laws is the answer to stopping much of the abuse and neglect that is out there.

Another major drawback to breeder licensing is the licensing fee. Responsible hobby breeders, who make up the majority of breeders, do not make money breeding animals. Many additionally show their animals which can become quite expensive with no monetary gain. Licensing fees vary in the laws that have passed but many end up charging $100-$300 per year for a license. In Camden NJ the fees are $500 per animal per year. This adds more expense onto what for many is a very expensive hobby and could promote more breeders becoming businesses in order to be able to continue breeding. Another downside is that many of the responsible breeders are spending their own money to help educate and promote responsible pet ownership. Their vital work would be cut down or even out due to prohibitive licensing fees. On the other hand breeders who are running mills will just see it as another necessary business expense they can swallow by breeding even more or charging more. So they can continue producing as many or even more animals irresponsibly while the responsible breeders are punished.

Failure of Breeder Licensing

For those pet owners who believe licensing will create a world of only responsible breeders, stamp out genetic problems, and ensure only the best animals are produced how exactly can this be accomplished? There are no laws about breeding to stop genetic problems, nor to breed only for temperament, etc so breeder licensing would not affect any of that. Remember the ordinances only require a license and then require basic care which is better spelled out in the Animal Welfare Act. It is impossible to legislate responsible breeding, that is only accomplished through education. Genetic problems are encountered in animals that have been produced at a mill (which is already required to be licensed and inspected by AWA) and irresponsible pet owners who allow their animals to reproduce. Even if one was able to write some sort of law to ensure responsible breeding how could it be enforced? One would need a much greater number of inspectors and then licensing fees would soar.

And of course we must ask ourselves is it fair to punish the majority of breeders who are responsible when it is a minority of irresponsible breeders and pet owners who contribute to problems? I'm sure most of us would recognize that it isn't fair and not needed. Again better enforcement of existing laws is the answer. Other problems with breeder licensing deals with the inspection elements. Many might believe there is nothing wrong with inspecting a breeder, and might even say if there is nothing wrong why mind. To begin with it is an invasion of privacy. Most breeders are hobbyists, they aren't running a business, the goal is not profit but pursuit of happiness, a right given to Americans in the Declaration of Independence. To require these people to submit to inspections is a violation of our rights. Again the majority of breeders and pet owners are responsible and not abusing or neglecting their animals. As a pet owner would you agree to inspections of your property twice a year at any time of day? In some breeder licensing laws as written they enable an inspector to enter your property at any time of day to conduct an inspection. Again this is forcing a hobbyist to give up a portion of their freedom by submitting to inspections at any time of day. What if the inspector arrived banging on your door at 3 in the morning.

And the other alarming aspect to the inspection requirements of breeder licensing laws is a lack of standardization in guidelines on care. For example in GA which requires all animal breeders to be licensed, rabbit breeders report an extreme variation in how they are inspected and what is allowed. Some inspectors schedule every inspection, some only do "surprise" inspections, others mix both or some other variation. One inspector does not believe hanging wire cages are acceptable and gives the breeder a problem at every inspection, however this form of housing is not only common but recommended by many rabbit experts due to better sanitation. Another problem popping up is with the definition of providing food. Most of these laws are broad and open to interpretation, usually it is written that food and water must be provided at all times. So what happens when you limit pellets, as is the advised method of feeding, and the inspector shows up before feeding time and bowls are empty? Some breeders have reported having to explain the concept of limited vs free feeding or face being hit with a violation.

As you can see inspections and breeder licensing aren't the answer. Some believe it will lessen or stop pet abandonment. Again there are no sections that cover preventing the irresponsible pet owner from dumping their pet. The breeder isn't the one taking the animal to the shelter! Animal Rights Activists say licensing is the only way to stop pet abandonment but that is only propaganda to trick the pet owner and legislators into supporting breeder licensing. Breeder licensing has been proven not to lessen abandonment. Studies done in San Mateo CA and King's County WA where model breeder licensing laws were passed show euthanasia rates have actually increased after licensing despite the previous decreasing trends. Also very few breeding licenses were taken out showing that there aren't even that many breeders to begin with.

If after reading this you still support breeder licensing how would you feel if it also covered pet owners. If the only way to ensure responsible breeding is to license breeders then it is also logical to apply the same requirements to pet owners. Are you now willing to pay excessive license fees and submit to mandatory inspections twice a year? And these laws have not stopped abuse and neglect. Also many pet owners are irresponsibly breeding their animals without a license but go unnoticed and in all likelihood will continue to bypass the licensing program.

Quotes from RES pet owner survey:

"I think it is a good idea, to allow for furthering of the breed. It is in the charter for almost all other companion animals, so why not companion rabbits? Regulation can only improve the breed, even if it does make life a little harder for the breeders."

RES response: What charter is this person talking about? I know of no charter in animal clubs that state there should be breeder licensing, AKC and CFA oppose breeder licensing. How would breeder licensing further the breed? How could it possibly improve the breed? Remember the regulations only cover basic housing, food, and sanitation, items the responsible breeder is already maintaining. If the majority of breeders are responsible then why do we need regulation to make their lives more difficult?

because breeders should know what they're doing, and have to be able to test and prove so. This would eliminate MANY backyard breeders. There are too many backyard breeders simply massproducing rabbits because they have a male and a female. Restriction would mean that only people breeding for the better of the breed would be doing it.

RES response: Again licensing does not restrict who is allowed to breed so it won't ensure only responsible breeders. And a test of knowledge is meaningless, the miller or irresponsible breeder can easily memorize the info, pass the test and then do what they want.

Too many rabbits are kept in filthy conditions by some of the breeders out here. Too many rabbits are allowed to breed despite diseases that are passed on simply to be sold to a pet store. Regulating this would help weed out the people giving the responsible breeders a bad name.

RES response: Licensing does not prevent breeding of unhealthy animals or those with genetic problems. And existing laws properly enforced would prevent rabbits kept in filthy or unhealthy conditions.

(27) to eliminate backyard breeders, and bad breeders. Yes, it would make it easier to pick out a good breeder from the bad ones.

RES response: How? Both would have a valid license. There are breeders with violations of the AWA that you wouldn't know about so how would additional licensing change any of that.

It seems like a good idea to keep track of how many breeders there are and in what conditions their animals are kept. I think that licensing would prevent a lot of "back yard" breeding operations, and would have no major effect on responsible breeders.

RES response: Again licensing doesn't prevent people from breeding. I have to wonder why this person feels it would be good to track the breeders? Those against breeding would like breeders tracked so they can work on eliminating them.

if regulated it encourages only responsible owners and benefits future generations from having flaws from unwanted breeding or irresponsible mating. So that they don't breed sick animals or ones with genetic defects. all breeding should be regulated so bunnies all have homes

RES response: Licensing has no mechanism to ensure every rabbit ends up in a good permanent home. And we have already explained how it doesn't stop genetic problems. Actually regulating and licensing pet rabbit owners may help the first couple of lines in the above response. Many rabbits ending up abandoned are the result of accidental litters by irresponsible pet owners.

The following is reprinted with author's permission, all names have been changed/deleted. I thought the following might be of use by breeders who are faced with a similar problem or better yet to prepare yourselves to face one. The city this took place in does have a limit law of no more than 10 rabbits allowed on a property. The Humane society apparently didn't know this. On an unhappy note, the zoning variance the author sought to enable her to have the rabbits was denied, the zoning board felt they did not want to set a precedance so they denied the variance. The local government was not helpful in explaining the procedures they have set by law to obtain a variance, good idea to hire an attorney to assist you in this type of legal matter.

The Humane Society:

Dec 1999 We were at the Humane Society and my daughter asked the guy at the counter about a kitten they had. The guy said they wouldn't let us have a kitten (which I wasn't about to get anyway since five is more than enough) because we were "about at the limit." I then asked if there was a limit on rabbits and was told no. Since he said we were "about at the limit" for cats and we had five, I assumed the limit was around six and we were ok. And since he said there wasn't any limit on rabbits, I assumed we were ok there too.

Sunday Feb 20, 2000 An officer for the Humane Society came by my house and informed me that there was a limit on rabbits and you could only have 10 adults. He said I would have about 10 days to remedy the situation.

Monday Feb 21, 2000 Holiday - Humane Society closed

Tuesday Feb 22, 2000 I called the Humane Society to inquire if there was a way to get a special license or waiver to keep the rabbits that we currently have. The lady on the phone told me that I would have to get a kennel license and to call City Code Enforcement. I called Code Enforcement and they said that they don't have anything to do with that and I would have to take that up with the Humane Society. I didn't want to talk to the same person again and had to go to work so I decided to call the next day.

Wednesday Feb 23, 2000 I called the Humane Society again, talked to Officer XXX. He told me that he didn't know what I should do but he would call around and find out. He also said he would try to find out who had been to my house and if he could get the extra time I needed to take to remedy the situation

Thursday Feb 24, 2000 I received a call back from Officer XXX. He informed me that I would have to get a license and gave me the phone numbers for the local Dept. of Agriculture and the State Vet in XXX. He also told me that the other officer was willing to give me the time I needed to take care of it. I called the Dept. of Agriculture from work since it was a local number. They informed me that they only did plants in their branch and suggested I try the State Vet. Since the State Vet was a long distance call, it would have to wait until I was able to go home early and call from there.

Friday Feb 25, 2000 I went home from work early, called the State Vet and explained the situation to the guy that answered the phone. He told me that I could get either a rescue license (since I had rescued the majority of the rabbits) or a breeder license. He said he would send me the paper work.

Tuesday Feb 29, 2000 I called the State Vet and was told the paper work was in the mail.

Wednesday Mar 1, 2000 I received the paperwork from the State Vet, but this only included the paper work for the rescue license -- not the breeder license.

Thursday Mar 2, 2000 I called the State Vet and talked to the vet, Dr. XXX. I asked him which would be better for me: the breeder license, the rescue license or a shelter license. He told me that I would probably be better off with the Breeder license. I also told them that I still hadn't received the paperwork for a breeder license; only for the rescue license. I was assured it would be sent.

Saturday Mar 4, 2000 The breeder license was $175. I didn't mind paying the fee, but just wanted to be sure that it would solve my problem with the city ordinance. I didn't want to pay the money and then find out that I still couldn't keep the rabbits. I took my friend to the Humane Society to look for her missing dog. While I was there, I asked for Officer XXX and was told he was out on a call. I left a message for him to call me.

Monday Mar 6, 2000 Or Tuesday Mar 7, 2000 Officer XXX returned my call. I told him that I could get a breeder's license from the State Vet and asked if that would definitely excuse me from the local ordinance limit. He said that he didn't know and told me to talk to the State Vet and find out what the license entailed and if it would solve my problem. I called Dr. xxx at the State Vet and left a message for him to return my call.

Wednesday Mar 8, 2000 Dr. xxx returned my call. He told me that he didn't know if the license would excuse me from the ordinance or not. He said the decision on that would rest with the director of the Humane Society, Dr. xxxx. I called Dr. xxx and explained my situation to him. I also explained that I was worried that my time would run out before I would have the problem solved. He told me that they wouldn't do anything as far as enforcing the code at this time and that he would find out if it was possible to get around the code and how and get back to me.

Thursday Mar 9, 2000 I received a call from Officer ssss at the Humane Society. She told me that I would need to call the Zoning Dept. and gave me the number and the name of the person she spoke to there. I called the person and explained my situation. She told me that I would need to talk to the Assistant Planner for my area who is AP and gave me her number. I called AP but her voice mail said she was on vacation for the week.

Sunday Mar 12, 2000 An officer from the Humane Society came by to see if I had gotten rid of any rabbits. I told her that I had just talked to Dr. xxx on Wednesday and Officer sss on Thursday and was told that I would be given the time I needed to straighten this out. She said that she would talk to Officer sss and find out what to do.

Monday Mar 13, 2000 I called AP and got her voice mail. I didn't want to leave a message because the first person that I talked to in that office was rather rude when I explained my situation and so I really wanted to speak to her directly. The officer from the Humane Society that was out to my house the day before put in an order for them to come back out on Sunday, March 26 to ticket me if the rabbits were still there. However, the officer did not contact me to let me know about this date. (I found this out on the 26th). In the meantime, I thought I was still under Dr. xxx's promise that I would have time to work this out.

Tuesday Mar 14, 2000 I called AP again and got her voice mail. Again, I didn't leave a message.

Wednesday Mar 15, 2000 I called AP again and got her voice mail. I was getting a little worried because I knew I needed to speak to her in order to get this taken care of. I dialed for the secretary and asked if x was often away from her desk. I was told that she was in the office somewhere and if I wanted to leave a message, she would get back to me quickly. I called AP again and left a brief message asking her to return my call. AP quickly called me back. I explained my situation to her and she said that she would send me the paperwork for a variance and that it would take at least 5 weeks to get a court date.

Wednesday Mar 22, 2000 I received the paperwork for the variance. It was very lengthy and I didn't have time to look at it right away. I decided to complete the paperwork over the weekend.

Saturday Mar 25, 2000 I sat down and looked over the variance paperwork. I couldn't figure out how to complete it since it seemed to be geared toward building permits rather than kennel licenses. I decided to call AP on Monday and ask for her help filling out the paperwork

Sunday Mar 26, 2000 Officer z from the Humane Society showed up at my door at around 7:30 a.m. and asked me if I still had the rabbits. I told him that I had 12 adults. I also explained to him that I had just gotten the variance paperwork in the middle of the week and that Dr. xxx told me I would have the time to complete it. He was very rude and told me that he was to give me a ticket immediately. I told him again that I was supposed to have the time to take care of this and that the only reason it was taking so long was because I couldn't get the correct information from the Humane Society. He then asked me if I still had my four dogs and five cats. I told him yes, wondering what my dogs had to do with this. I know that you can only have four dogs and have never had more than four. He said (very rudely that I was in violation right there because you can only have four dogs and four cats. So he gave me a ticket for too many rabbits and for too many cats. I called Dr. xxx and reminded him that he said I could have the time I needed to get the variance. He said that I needed to call him in the office on Tuesday and if there was a variance and I applied for it, he would take care of the ticket. I told him that I hadn't applied for the variance because I had only received the paperwork a few days ago. He told me to call him in the office Tuesday

Monday Mar 27, 2000 I called AP and told her that I was confused about the paperwork. We set up an appointment on Friday afternoon so that I could get her help with it.

Tuesday Mar 28, 2000 I called a few times and left messages for Dr. xxx.

Wednesday Mar 29, 2000 I called and left a few more messages or Dr. xxx. I spoke to a few people at the Humane Society and was told that they were essentially not going to help me anymore. They told me that this was my problem and that they had gone above and beyond the call of duty when they researched and told me how to get a variance. They told me that was not their job and that it was really my problem to find out how to get a variance.

Friday Mar 31, 2000 I met with AP, and we went over what I needed to do to complete the paperwork.

Sunday April 2, 2000 Sent 6 adult rabbits and 1 young rabbit to my sister to keep until we move. Sent my daughter's kitten to stay with my father until we either move or allowed to have him back through the variance.

Fighting Restrictive Breeding Legislation

Are YOU Running Out of Time?

One of the frightening aspects of restrictive breeding ordinances is that they seem to appear and are voted on at lightning speed. A recent example is the Toronto Exotic Animal Bill apparently introduced in the summer and voted on Dec 1 1998. 3-4 days prior to the vote the internet was baraged with notices of the hearing and of the bill, however it was woefully inadequate time to do anything about it. It seems most of these bills receive little attention until too late. This is why you must be ready well in advance to fight this type pf legislation. Read this entire web site and become familar with what's on it, bookmark it for later use. Discuss the issues with your fellow breeders and local clubs. Come up with a few ideas and plans in case you are faced with a RBO. You can do other things in advance too. Remember animal rights activists are working with legislators to draft these bills and filling their heads with false information about widespread abuse, cruelty, and abandonment. Beat them to the punch. Write letters to your legislators telling them you do not support animal rights. Have your local clubs and breeders do the same. Meet with legislators as an individual or better as a club and educate them about the realities of animal care and treatment, also give them a written statement they can refer to in the future. Invite politicians to your shows to give out a special award. Work on giving the public and your legislators a positive image of rabbit breeding and breeders. And don't overlook allies in the breeding world, local dog, cat, avian, reptile clubs as well as farm associations, 4-H, vets, shelters, and other groups who share your same beliefs about animals can make or break your fight. Remember you may not have much time left before your community or state is hit with an RBO, make the time left productive and you stand a much better chance!

Resources to Fight Restrictive Breeding Legislation

Informational Sheets Designed to pass out to lawmakers, pet owners, and breeders

In order to defeat this type of legislation you have to have accurate information to prove the failure of restricting or blaming breeders.

-Find out how many rabbits are taken in each year at your local shelter, how many adopted out, and importantly how many ADOPTABLE rabbits are euthanized. Animal Rights Activists often add the number of unadoptable animals to euthaniasia figures to inflate the numbers. This is to prove to legislators that there is an "overpopulation". An unadoptable animal is often one that the shelter deems too sick, or aggressive to adopt out and is immediately euthanized. What information is important to learn is what is the accurate number of animals that are adoptable but aren�t at the shelter, this number more accurately reflects the numbers of unwanted animals in your local area being killed. Try to gather data for as many years as possible. This is often difficult for rabbits, many shelters only keep the numbers for one year on hand if any. Be sure to begin tracking the shelter rabbit population NOW, waiting until restrictive legislation arrives is too late.
Does your state have any pending legislation or passed any that requires shelters to track and report on the number of cats and dogs they deal with yearly? If they do why not work with other breeders and local breeder clubs to add rabbits to that bill or law, it would make tracking shelter figures much easier! Write a brief letter to the sponsors of the bill requesting that an amendment adding rabbits to the shelter bill be done. It would help to provide reasons why it should be done, use the same reasons they had to include dogs and cats, and get as many breeders and clubs to write in or sign a petition.

-Show the legislators that restrictive breeding legislation fails to stop "overpopulation" or even to lower euthanasia. Do this by using studies that show RBOs are a failure. NAIA has done this for both San Mateo County and Washington�s King County, both are used by ARAs as model RBOs. -Conduct your own studies of the shelter rabbit problem in your area. Use surveys to determine where people are getting the rabbits they decide to abandon, risk factors for abandonment, etc. Be as accurate as you can and gather as much information as possible. Try to enlist the aid of other breeders.

-Use the media to get your side of the story out. Be sure to supply press releases that state why RBOs won�t work and why they are not needed. Be sure to play up the fact that those in favor of it are animal rights activists, the general public still does not support ARs.

-Educational Campaigns. The ARAs will work on their own educational campaign, be sure to counter their attempts to paint breeders as the cause of overpopulation. In the Fund For Animal legislative booklet it is suggested that activists use several different methods of getting their message out:
-Offer Spay/neuter specials at local clinics
-School programs, it is suggested activists talk to teachers to find out if they discuss overpopulation, and try to get a chance to speak to the class. It also suggests you involve the children in the campaign, get them to write letters to editors and have fund drives.
-Provide printed material such as brochures or fact sheets. Design your own fact sheets that contain the truth and design them to win support for your side.
-Have legislators pass Resolutions endorsing observances (Be Kind to Animals Weeks) or to state opinions on issues. You have to check with city hall to see what steps are involved to introducing a resolution. FFA lists the following steps to take:
1. Draft the resolution
2. Secure a sponsor
3. Submit copy to legislators for considerations
4. get a list of committee members
5. get "experts" to present testimony and counter the oppositions arguments
6. lobby committee members with letter writing campaigns and phone calls
7. Attend meetings to lobby legislators
-Rallies & demonstrations-raise public awareness, generate media coverage, and win support
-Petitions: provides opportunities for education & gauge support of citizens
-Door Hangars: "plaster neighborhoods with your message"
-Newspaper ads: if paid ads are to costly, try getting a business to underwrite the cost for you
-Billboards: Some companies offer donated space to not for profit groups
-Letters to the Editors: called one of the most effective and cost efficient ways to educate your community. It also suggests that if several letters are received on an issue the newspaper may do a story. Letters should be well written, brief, and include reasons why an ordinance is needed (or in our case why it isn�t).
-Press Packet: One should be sent to the local media. It should include; an overview of the issue, info about your organization or coalition, history of what has been done in the past to address overpopulation, graph of animal statistics, quotes from public officials supporting the ordinance, list of endorsing organizations and individuals, & press release. A press release is a fancy word for a letter conveying information about an event or issue. List a contact person, be sure it is short but an attention grabber, and include some of the important info. This is sent to the media in hopes they will run a story.
-Other aspects of the media to use: editorial support from newspapers (send to editorial page editor, state your position, why ordinance needed, how it will solve overpopulation, make clear you are requesting editorial support from the paper, include a copy of the ordinance & background info and follow-up with a phone call a week later), Talk shows (develop a local media list and include radio & TV shows to contact for an interview, request in writing and then follow-up with phone call), Public Service Announcement (not the platform to promote legislation but the activists will use them for educational purposes), Calendar items (many newspapers have a section listing upcoming events, list your event there include info on what, when, where, & why), Free Speech Messages ( mostly TV stations that allow for a 30-60 second forum for people to give speeches or rebuttals, call for info about length and steps to request airtime).

Zoning and Rabbits

To understand zoning you must first understand the classification of rabbits. At this time rabbits are not classified at the federal level of government. Some states have classified them as livestock while others don't list them as livestock but include them under pets. Local levels of government (cities and towns) can classify them as well or some use the state definition of livestock. Zoning problems usually arise when a local municipality has classified rabbits as livestock or set limits on the number allowed and a rabbit breeder is turned in for a zoning violation. Also be aware that a violation can occur if you are running a business, not disposing of manure, or have an odor problem. You must check your local zoning code.

What you need to understand is that whatever the law mandates is what you are bound by. I have witnessed people argue with local zoning board of appeals when they believe the law is unfair, but the appeals board can't do anything, they must administer the law. Likewise the code enforcement officer is following the law if you are reported for a zoning violation, arguing with them is useless and could hurt you in the long run. An unfair law must be changed by lobbying your local legislators. Don't expect someone else to do this for you, it may never get done.

If you already know you are in violation of zoning, you should develop a plan of action as one never knows when someone will turn you in. Decide how you will argue your case and how you will try to change the law. You may need to hire an attorney and pay fees in order to attempt a change in zoning law. Have a list of allies you can call to lend their support for a change in zoning, be sure to recruit respected town leaders as well as anyone involved with animals (rabbit clubs both local and national, breeders, vets, feed dealers, shelters, agriculture societies, pet owners, neighbors, family, friends, co-workers, etc). Try to get one or more legislators on your side. Involve the media!

If you get a notice of violation check on the amount of time you have to remove your animals. Try to find another location where you can legally have them so you don't have to sell off your herd. Check into the appeals process for zoning violation, use the law to your advantage. When dealing with officials, especially code enforcement officers be polite, make friends with them as they can be your biggest ally, or enemy if they aren't treated properly.

I have heard several first hand accounts of breeders bad experiences with zoning. In nearly every case it begins with a neighbor turning the breeder in for a zoning violation. In Bob Bennett's book "Raising Rabbits the Modern Way" he discusses why it is advantageous not to tell your neighbors you have rabbits. Why? They are unlikely to purchase a pet from you, and that in itself may be a source of problems if they did buy a pet from you. More importantly they may turn you in at some point. Even if you think you get along famously with a neighbor it's no guarantee of future problems.

At this point I'd like to relate my own zoning story, which is fairly typical of the whole. The day before we went on vacation I received a letter in the mail from our code enforcement officer. It basically said that I was running a business of breeding and selling Netherland Dwarfs from my home and as there was no record of the proper permits to do this I was to cease. This came as a total shock. I had told a few people on our street that I was raising rabbits and everyone thought that was just great. Luckily, I was aware of what our zoning code said, and that rabbits weren't listed as livestock (our town uses the state definition). I was so upset I cried for quite awhile before I called the code officer. I was very polite as this individual had a reputation and explained that I received the letter and did not understand what I was in violation of since rabbits weren't specifically mentioned in our town code. He said that the problem was in whether or not I was running a business, as a home based business required permits. Notice in this "land of the free" we have allowed ourselves to become over regulated, you can't "do your business" without a permit or license anymore. I then explained it was a hobby and that by IRS terms I was not a business. All he wanted to know was if I claimed it on my taxes and/or had filed a DBA (doing business as), that is probably what most would ask in determining if it's a business or hobby.

It turned out that my next door neighbor reported to the town supervisor that I had a barn full of rabbits and was selling them as a business. She lied btw as my rabbits are indoors and at that time I had 15 rabbits, hardly a barn full. I suspected it was her when I received the letter but the officer was very reluctant to reveal the identity of the stool pigeon. Some breeders have told me they were told they would need a lawyer to get the name of the person who turned them in. And it was reported to me that a rabbit rescuer (House Rabbit Society rescuer in this particular case) was claiming responsibility for turning a breeder in for a zoning violation. It would make sense, they are trying to stop breeding and reporting a zoning violation pretty much puts an end to it. If you live near any rabbit rescuers it would be best to be wary.

Back to my story, why did the "nice" old spinster turn me in? She knew for two years I had rabbits, she had come over to see them on occasion and thought it was great I was into showing. It went back almost a year to when we told her she couldn't dump her garbage on our property. She had done so with the previous two owners and fully expected to continue. She never told us she was angry that we told her to stop, although she did complain to my parents, instead she waited almost a year to turn me into zoning and take her revenge. So the moral of the story is don't trust your neighbors! Friends today, who knows what tomorrow. Many breeders have been in the same boat, a friendly neighbor who turns out to have been the culprit, and often the reason is due to some perceived injustice you committed. They don't care about the rabbits but know it will get to you.

Of course there are those neighbors who simply think of rabbits as livestock and do not want to live next to a rabbit breeder. This group as with the other will often complain to officials about mystery odors that they always smell, just not when the officials come to investigate. This situation is very difficult as the squeaky wheel gets oiled and you find yourself harassed. A breeder in CA went through what can only be described as hell with just such a neighbor. Along with zoning animal control was called in. Despite all parties agreeing that her animals were well kept and clean, and no odors were ever present during an inspection, they tried to force her to cut down drastically on the number of rabbits and also began applying pet store regulations on her. She was getting surprise inspections at all hours, including late at night. Even the police were sent to patrol around her house to check for an odor. I don't know what the outcome was but she was in the process of getting a lawyer. Legal representation is a must in these cases, of course it isn't cheap and no one will reimburse you.

Other forms of restrictive zoning include setting limits on the number of rabbits you can own, or limits based on property size, restricting the location of any outdoor hutches or barns (usually in the form of distance from property lines), prohibiting rabbits outright or keeping them outside or in hutches, restricting manure on property, restrictions based on if you live in an area classified as residential. Zoning problems was mentioned as a reason ARBA membership is dwindling, and one can easily see why. This can be very restrictive for rabbits breeders. It is also why you need to check laws prior to moving to new areas and also monitor what is currently going on in your local government in case changes are made to zoning or it is adopted. Many times towns will adopt ordinances similar to neighboring areas. For example San Francisco has a law prohibiting the sale of pet rabbits (you can only sell them for meat). Irvine also has the same law, adopted close to when the San Francisco law went into effect.

A final note, we need to help each other out when there are zoning problems, strength in numbers thing plus who knows when it might be your turn! Write letters opposing restrictive zoning, educate your lawmakers, do whatever it takes to stop the regulation of rabbit breeding.

Laws and Grandfather clauses

For those who think you're safe because of "grandfather clauses" think again. What a GC does is say what you are doing is a non-conforming use because of a change in zoning. You think that will protect you from any future problems. However, the town is looking at you and saying since you are a non-conforming use the goal is to get that property back into a conforming use status. Years go by and suddenly you get a notice of zoning violation in the mail. You inquire and say hey I'm grandfathered. The zoning code officer asks you to prove it. What you now have to do is prove that from before the time zoning was adopted, up to the present time you have been performing the non-conforming use continually without interruption. If at any point you stopped, for any amount of time the GC is null and void. If the officer is a jerk he might say your proof is invlaid, then you go to the zoning appeals board. They hammer you with questions and it's your burden to prove to them you have been continuing uninterrupted for X # of yrs. If they decide they will accept your claims, and if you get enough community support to make it a hot issue, you get screwed again. This time they send the code officer out to inspect your property and detail exactly what you're doing, how much space it takes up etc. You are not allowed to expand, if you decrease the size of the operation you are not allowed to increase it even if only to the point of the original size. Remember the goal is to make your property a conforming use again. The above is what happens, I'm on our town's zoning board of appeals and witnessed first hand the grandfather clause in "inaction" when a local jack of all trades was charged with zoning violations. He had to prove he was doing a number of trades on his property continually from 1972 to 1998. The town demanded copies of all his business records, which he didn't have from a period in the 80's back to before 1972, didn't know he'd need them! I sat and watched witness after witness testify that the person was conducting said businesses on his property since before 1972. So they were hammered with questions like "did you ever see money change hands", one board member argued with two about how did they know the vegetable stand in the front yard was a vegetable stand. It was pathetic, and the town did all it could to try and stop the non-conforming use. It was well known throughout the town that this family did a number of odd jobs so it wasn't like they weren't known by the town officials, and they were certainly an asset to the community. In the end they did decide several activities could no longer be done on the property because there wasn't enough proof that they had been done continually since prior to zoning. They had the code officer define and detail what was being done, and to the extent that the amount of space used to sell vegetables or Christmas trees was measured and recorded. The only reason he got off easy was that many other farmers and contractors were also grandfathered and they rallied to his side for fear they were next. Sorry this is long but I want everyone to understand that the GC is no protection, at any time the town can decide they want to go after you for non-conforming use and unless you're prepared and have the money to hire an attorney you're likely to lose. Same with laws, if one is on the books at any time it can be enforced. Again here in town the officials have decided to start enforcing the sign ordinance. They started with new businesses and are working back to the old. Imagine being told that the sign you had out for over 8 yrs. is in violation and must be removed? Just happened last month to one business, and I'm sure there are others. Just starting to see the cases in the appeals board. I know in CA there are some wacky laws, like San Francisco and the prohibition on selling pet rabbits, if it's a law it can be enforced and arguing that they didn't bother for X yrs. is not a defense. As for classification, you all need to check your town law, see if they define livestock or not, and your state laws. There are all different levels, your state could define different livestock than your local town, sometimes, like where I live, the local level uses the state level definition. If something is defined at federal level it is more likely the states will take that classification. The local level which would be your towns and cities are different, they may be more stringent as to what they allow, this seems to be the case, but a federal and/or state classification would have some impact on the local decision. Legislation is not a fun topic, I myself hate it, but it's like cleaning cages, if you don't bother the "you know what" piles up and then it's a big smelly mess. If you let it pile up too much it might get so big that you can't fix it. I'm not sure my doom and gloom warnings are really getting thru to people, rabbits are getting the unwanted attention of animal rights, now the federal government, the onslaught is just beginning and we are the ONLY ones who stand in defense of rabbit breeding, each and every one of us. If all of us as individuals don't "clean the cages" regularly we won't have rabbits to worry about. Check my site the evidence is on there if you doubt me.

Laws Pertaining to Rabbits

Please help us make this page complete and accurate. Send me copies or web site addresses of legislation affecting rabbits.

Rabbits are not officially classified as livestock by USDA*, be sure to check your state�s and local government�s definitions. They are also not classified as companion animals, this offers protection against the goals of animal rights activists (see article about CA initiative and Horse Owners).

FEDERAL LEGISLATION

USDA/APHIS page, Location of Animal Welfare Act
Animal Welfare Act highlights:
"Ensuring proper animal care and comfort is not just good business-it is also required by law under the Animal Welfare Act. Passed by Congress in 1966 and amended in 1970, 1976, 1985, 1990, the law protects many animals not raised for food or fiber."
Many breeders seem confused about the AWA and what exactly it covers. In an effort to promote education I�m summarizing and quoting sections which apply to rabbit breeders. Please read this carefully to see whether or not you require a license or have an exemption.
"The rabbit business is exempt from regulation from regulation if the rabbits are intended only for food or fiber. If any rabbits are designated for use in the pet, exhibit, or laboratory-animal trade, the business is regulated. " "No exempt business has to be licensed or registered."
-Exempt businesses: "Retail Pet stores-Anyone whose entire business consists of selling domestic animals to pet owners is exempt. However if as part of your business you exhibit animals, you may have to be licensed as an exhibitor."
"For example, you need an exhibitors license if you take animals outside the store for teaching or promotion or if you set up a petting display. You must be licensed as a dealer if you sell wild or exotic animals or if you sell regulated animals to other retailers, research institutions, exhibitors, or other animal dealers."
"Direct Sales: Anyone who sells domestic pets directly to pet owners is exempt, regardless of the sales volume. Such sales can be made in person or by mail."
"Hobby Breeders: Small scale breeders with gross sales under $500 per year are exempt, as long as these sales do not include wild or exotic animals, dogs or cats. If you own no more than three breeding female dogs or cats and sell the offspring into pet channels only, you are exempt."
"Animal Dealers: If your business falls under any of the categories of "dealers" listed below, you must be licensed by USDA. You cannot be licensed or registered as an exhibitor. You must be licensed according to what type of activity is your predominant business."
Regulated businesses:
"Pet Wholesalers-Anyone importing, buying, selling, or trading pets in wholesale channels must be licensed."
"Pet Breeders-Anyone breeding pets for the wholesale trade must be licensed." "Some small scale breeders can qualify for an exemption-see hobby breeders."
Laboratory Animal Dealers
Laboratory Animal Breeders
Animal Brokers-"Anyone who deals in regulated animals but does not take physical possession must be licensed."
Summary list from USDA:
Brokers-Licensed
Direct Sales-exempt
Hobby breeders-exempt
pet stores-exempt
Pet Animal Trade-Breeders:
Direct Sales-exempt
Sales via pet stores-licensed
Brokers-licensed

US state Animal Import Regulations

pending federal rabbit legislation

STATE LEGISLATION

State Web Site Links
CALIFORNIA

*San Francisco prohibits the sale of pet rabbits in the city AND county, this also includes giving rabbits away or bartering.

COLORADO
Exisiting laws for Colorado

CO Springs Chap regulation of animals

FLORIDA

Exisiting laws for FL

Dade County: Section 5-2.2
This section is now law. Last I heard an ARAs had legislators add requirements for rabbits to the pet store section of this ordinance. Prior it covered regulation of dog & cat breeders, kennels, and pet stores.
GEORGIA

*Note all rabbit breeders are required to be licensed in Georgia (exemption exists regarding sale of adult rabbits as pets
MASSACHUSETTS
Town Of Dennis: Regulations covering rabbit care and rabbitries

MICHIGAN
State Shelter reporting law for Dogs, Cats, & Ferrets.

NEW YORK

prohibits selling dyed rabbits and rabbits have to be 8 weeks old to sell. Not defined as livestock per state law

NYC Council considering restrictive breeding ordinance (Intro456), no other details available please send updates if you find out anything. Council web site: http://council.nyc.ny.us

TEXAS

Exisiting laws for Houston & San Antonio
Pending:
Houston: Pet Store Ordinance Draft-Bill Defeated! Link
Houston Animal Welfare Coalition Site!

Canada & Other Countries

Toronto legislation limiting number of rabbits, dogs, cats, to no more than 6.