Rabbit Breeder Licensing Section

The Breeder Licensing aka Mandatory Spay/Neuter laws pdf file is a detailed document written in 2008 that discusses why Breeder Licensing/MSN fails to stop or lessen animal abandonment. The document is very specific as to the effect on rabbits and rabbit breeders as well as detailing information about dogs and cats and breeder licensing. It contains examples of how these ordinances have failed. Mandatory spay/neuter laws always contain breeder licensing so don't let a different name lull you into a false sense of security. These laws are meant to eliminate hobby breeders. The document discusses how while activists say the goal is to go after commercial breeding-what they refer to as "mills", in reality these laws only impact hobby breeders.

The Breeder Licensing document was written as a resource to help breeders fight BL and MSN bills before they become law. It also contains information about rabbit classification, various types of breeders, population statistics, and even zoning issues. This is a very comprehensive document that can be delivered directly to legislators. Please use this tool to protect your rights to breed and own animals.

Anti-Breeding Laws Are Unconstitutional Response to ISAR article declaring anti-breeder laws constitutional. ISAR is a hard core animal rights organization.

The following are older articles written between 1998-early 2000. While there has been unfortunately advances in the animal rights movement against breeders much of the following is very applicable to our problems today. It also gives readers a historical background on Breeder Licensing and Restrictive Breeding Ordinances.

Article: Breeder Licensing the New Animal Rights Weapon

How Does Breeder Licensing Hurt Breeders?

Article: What's Wrong With Breeder Licensing?

Article: The Failure of Breeder Licensing

Fight Restrictive Breeding Ordinances aka Breeder Licensing

How To Fight Restrictive Breeding Ordinances (or Breeder Licensing)

Resource Links For More Information

Breeder Licensing: The New Animal Rights Weapon


You have to laugh at their antics and wonder if their parents smoked too many funny cigarettes, but do the animal rightists pose more of a danger than we previously thought? I believe the answer is yes. These ARAs are very passionate about animal issues and would like nothing more than to stop all breeding of companion animals. Perhaps they have found a way to achieve that goal in the form of restrictive legislation. A number of prominent AR groups have begun using a new rallying cry, "Spay or Pay". The feature we need to worry about is requiring breeders to obtain a license. The ordinances I'm discussing here applies only to cats and dogs at present time, however with groups such as HRS, can regulating rabbit breeding be far behind? As you read this article keep in mind that we are next on the ARAs agenda. Drafts of bills requiring rabbit breeders to be licensed have already turned up. (update 4/04 NYS & ME are considering licensing rabbit breeders, WI almost last year, GA and CO require breeders to be licensed)

"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.

How Does Breeder Licensing Hurt Breeders?

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. Plus many breeders in residential areas would not be allowed to be a business and that would include getting the permits the RBO's require. 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 ineffective 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 restrictive 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.

Restrictive Breeding Ordinances


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).

Resource Links

NAIA opposition to MSN
NAIA Long term Health Risks Associated w/ SN in dogs Laura J Sanborn M.S. May 14 2007

Sneaking the "Big Lie" through the Back Door: How Special Interest Groups are Hijacking Local Legislation by Margaret Anne Cleek California State University, Sacramento; Richard Guarino California State University, Sacramento; Michael Youril California State University, Sacramento

Mandatory Spay/neuter Resources Great resource with background info on MSN and examples of it's failure by Turkish Dogs

Mandatory Desexing AVA Nice chart listing MSN failures as well as reasons against passing it, veterinary source.

Missing the Target: Mandatory Spay/Neuter Legislation Fails to Reach Most Intact Cats