USA

What’s Hot … UPDATE: 09/01/2026 Palm Beach County, Florida Board of County Commissioners Meeting on Hobby Breeder Restrictions and Other Updates to its Animal Care and Control Ordinance

 

Kelly Crouch, CFA Legislative Information Liaison

The Palm Beach County, FL Board of Commissioners has added the preliminary reading of the proposed repeal and replace Animal Care and Control Ordinance to the September 1, 2026 Board of County Commissioners meeting agenda. The Commission will also decide whether to advertise the ordinance at that meeting. The draft ordinance would affect cat and dog hobby breeders in the county and would make hobby breeding more expensive by increasing hobby breeder permit fees from $150 to $400 per year. According to the ordinance summary, the increase is meant to cover the cost of implementing the program, which is currently $66,000 per year. Mandatory inspections would be conducted at least once a year as a condition of annual permit renewal. Cats over four months and dogs over six months must be sterilized without an approved hobby breeder permit and an intact license. Only one Hobby permit shall be issued per parcel of land. A hobby breeder is defined as “any person who intentionally or unintentionally causes or allows the breeding or studding of a dog or cat or engages in the breeding of up to two (2) litters of dogs or cats or nineteen (19) dogs or cats per household or premises per one-year period.” [Emphasis added.]

 The proposed draft removes the term “or unintentional” from the definition of hobby breeder, but unintentional shows up in the new definition of illegal breeder. An “Illegal breeder shall mean any person who intentionally or unintentionally causes or allows the breeding or studding of a dog or cat or engages in such without an approved Hobby Breeder permit”. Illegal breeders must sterilize their animals within 30 days of the notice of noncompliance. They will also be ineligible for a Hobby Breeder permit for one year. There are no lesser penalties for a first-time offense.

Hobby breeding is already very restrictive in the county. The proposed draft would significantly increase costs for hobby breeders. With the illegal breeder provisions, it could end breeding programs and eliminate valuable lines important to maintaining genetic diversity and health in the breed.

Other proposed changes include clarifying the number of animals allowed for certain size parcels of land, reducing the hold period in shelters for cats without microchips (electronic animal identification device), commercial breeder requirements, and the manner of keeping animals.  

Agendas for the Board of Commissioners can be found at https://discover.pbc.gov/countycommissioners/Pages/Meeting-Dates.aspx

The proposed ordinance can be found at http://www.pbcgov.com/pubInf/Agenda/20260901/5D1.pdf

What’s Hot … The New World Screwworm Impact on Fanciers

 

Kelly Crouch, CFA Legislative Information Liaison

The New World Screwworm (NWS) infestation in Texas and New Mexico will impact fanciers traveling to U.S. shows or traveling with pets for any reason. Most states and the federal government have implemented rules on pet travel. Minnesota’s restrictions start with the common ones, but the state adds additional mandates on top of them (see below). Even Texas, with the most screwworm cases, has implemented travel restrictions for animals in and around the infested counties. Complicating matters further, some local governments, such as Palm Beach County, Florida, are considering or have implemented restrictions on pets traveling to or through their jurisdictions. The U.S. eradicated the screwworm in 1966, and a small outbreak in Florida in 2017, so this will be completely new to many of us.

The NWS fly lays eggs in open wounds or in the mouth, nose, and ears of warm-blooded animals, including humans. Of the 39 cases detected, three have been in dogs. None have been detected in cats yet. Infestations spread most widely through eggs laid on hosts and developing pupae. These maggots are more dangerous than others because they feed on live tissue, which can cause secondary bacterial infections or even death. Most fly larvae feed on dead tissue.

Understandably, states and localities that are not yet affected by the NWS want to remain that way. Show managers and fanciers need to understand these laws will vary from place to place. Some restrictions use the term ‘import’, but since an infected animal that is only passing through or staying temporarily can cause new infestations, one wonders whether the term is defined more broadly than usual in those cases. While the police could inspect animals in cars, it is more likely fanciers will run into hotels and airlines requiring proof that any animals they are traveling with are Screwworm-free. Animal control may also visit shows to require proof, much like they sometimes do with rabies vaccinations.

The only way to stop infestations is with sterilized flies. It takes time to sterilize enough flies to stop the infestation, and it will be months before a facility can produce sterilized flies in large quantities. Thus, the problem and the restrictions will be here for some time. Hopefully, fanciers will not have to deal with an NWS infection; however, Texas A&M University has an article on detecting and preventing infections here. The American Veterinary Medical Association has information on treating NWS. Examine your pets frequently and treat all wounds and umbilical cords with approved insecticides. Given the small number of NWS cases, fanciers should not fear attending shows in uninfected areas, but should include NWS travel preparedness in their travel plans and decisions. Links to the federal website and state resources with active NWS restrictions are available here. Local jurisdictions are not listed but should be checked for pet travel requirements. As this is a developing situation, more jurisdictions may implement or change their own programs to supplement federal requirements.

Minnesota Board of Animal Health Import Restrictions for NWS:

“Minnesota Import Requirements for Dogs and Cats Entering from States with New World Screwworm (NWS) Infestations and Endemic Areas:

  • Animals from USDA-designated active NWS sites will not be allowed import to Minnesota. The Board of Animal Health will allow imports from states with USDA-active cases if they meet all import requirements outlined in this policy.
  • A Certificate of Veterinary Inspection (CVI) must be issued by an accredited veterinarian within 72 hours prior to transport. The CVI is valid for seven days from the date of issuance. The CVI must include the USDA-required certification attesting the animal has been inspected and determined to be free of NWS and that all applicable NWS import requirements have been satisfied.
  • Email a valid rabies vaccination certificate or pet passport to pet. travel.bah@state.mn.us no later than three days before the animal’s arrival in Minnesota.
  • An EPA- or FDA-approved NWS treatment must be administered to dogs and cats following the manufacturers’ dosing guidelines. The product name, dosage and date of treatment must be listed on the CVI and also emailed to pet.travel.bah@state.mn.us within five days of departure.
  • All animals will be quarantined for a minimum of five days upon arrival in Minnesota. Board of Animal Health staff will verify the quarantine is being followed and confirm quarantine release details.
  • Animals that do not meet import requirements will be quarantined for a minimum of 10 days and must be examined by a licensed veterinarian, who must confirm in writing that the animal is free of NWS and note the exam date.
  • Immediately notify pet.travel.bah@state.mn.us if any signs of NWS develop during quarantine.”

What’s Hot … Hobby Breeder Restrictions in Palm Beach County, Florida, andSpay/Neuter in Monterey County, California and Honolulu, Hawaii

 

Kelly Crouch, CFA Legislative Information Liaison

Palm Beach County, Florida
The Palm Beach County, FL Board of Commissioners is considering amendments to the animal ordinance that would make its extremely restrictive hobby breeder ordinance even more restrictive. Currently, a hobby breeder is defined as “ any person who intentionally or unintentionally causes or allows the breeding or studding of a dog or cat or engages in the breeding of up to two (2) litters of dogs or cats or nineteen (19) dogs or cats per household or premises per one-year period.” Proposed changes would reduce the cap to one litter of dogs or cats and eliminate the language about 19 dogs or cats. The threshold for commercial breeders
would similarly be reduced to more than one litter. If adopted, hobby breeders will have to decide whether to reduce their activities accordingly or become commercial breeders. Prior to making that decision, the breeder will want to become familiar with the commercial breeder requirements, which are also subject to amendment. Maintaining a genetically diverse program with two litters per year is exceedingly difficult; trying to do that with one litter per year guarantees the number of commercial breeders in the county, adding to the unnecessary burden borne by the County and small home breeders alike.
The proposal also seeks to amend the animals-per-acreage section of the law. As it stands, a person could have ten Great Danes without obtaining an excessive animal permit, whereas on the same property, 12 cats would be a violation. The suggested amendments would also take into consideration the type of property. It also eliminates the excessive animal permit. Among
the other changes are amendments to the dog and cat sales requirements, hold times, and facility requirements.
The Department of Public Safety, Animal Care and Control Division will be holding another public comment session on the proposed ordinance on Saturday, July 11, 2026.


Monterey County, California
County officials are poised to adopt an ordinance requiring dogs and cats in the county’s unincorporated areas to be sterilized. Ordinance 26-008 has revised the sterilization exemptions in Ordinance 26-005, added unaltered animal certificates and breeder permits. Anyone who allows a dog or cat kept within the unincorporated areas of the county to breed “with the intent to sell, gift, or transfer the offspring for money” must first obtain an annual breeder permit. The Animal Control Officer will establish program procedures, including limiting the number of permits that can be issued in a given year. Permits will not be issued for animals
under one year of age or over seven years of age. Ordinance 26-008 was presented at the June 23rd County of Monterey Board meeting, with a motion to introduce the ordinance, waive the first reading, and place it on the July 7, 2026, meeting consent agenda for final approval (it may be removed from the consent agenda upon request). The Board unanimously adopted the motion.


Honolulu, Hawaii
Hawaiians faced several attempts to get a mandatory spay/neuter law enacted at the state level. One concern about making sterilization mandatory for all cat- and dog-owning residents was the high cost of sterilization surgery that pet owners are facing these days. Honolulu is developing rules and regulations for its spay/neuter program. Prices range from $100 to $450
for city residents. The fees may increase depending on the pet’s age and weight. The proposed rules also authorize much lower fees for homeless and low-income residents meeting certain conditions. As residents can anticipate future mandatory spay/neuter efforts, fanciers may want to monitor proposed rules for the city’s spay/neuter program and require transparency to evaluate the program’s effectiveness. Honolulu’s Department of Customer Service is seeking public input at an in-person public hearing on July 9, 2026. The draft rules and more information are available here.

What’s Hot … Mid-session Updates: FL, GA, HI, IA, and MD

 

Kelly Crouch, CFA Legislative Information Liaison

Florida
There have been many attempts over the past 29 years to regulate dog breeders in the state. Once again, those efforts died when SB 1356 and HB 1521 failed to progress.
Senate Bill 1004 amends the consumer protection laws governing pet sales and animal cruelty. It has been enrolled and sent to the governor. If enacted, the pet dealer threshold is raised to selling more than three litters or 30 dogs or cats per year, record-
keeping requirements are added for all pet dealers, and best management practices are established for dog breeders. The bill was signed by the governor.

Georgia
Senate Bill 590 would have expanded regulations on dog breeders had it been enacted. Cat breeders would not have been impacted. Georgia has one of the most restrictive cat and dog breeder laws in the country. Fortunately, the bill died and will not carry over into 2027.

Hawaii
Several bills were introduced in Hawaii that would have burdened cat and dog breeders. House Bill
1594 and SB 3012 would prohibit intact cats and dogs from being imported unless the breeder was registered with the
Department of Agriculture and Biosecurity. House Bill 1736-2 would establish a spay/neuter fund at the cost of mandating the sterilization of all cats. Any free-roaming cats caught and sterilized could only be placed in sanctuaries. Fortunately, all these bills died and will not carry over to 2027. Fanciers should expect renewed efforts in 2027.

Iowa
Senate Bill 2306 would have subjected “commercial” breeders to inspection. It would have defined a commercial breeder as “a
person, engaged in the business of breeding dogs or cats, who sells, exchanges, or leases dogs or cats in return for consideration, or who offers to do so, whether or not the animals are raised, trained, groomed, or boarded by the person. A person who owns or harbors three or fewer breeding males or females is not a commercial breeder.” It died.

Maryland
House Bill 1551 died when the legislature adjourned. The bill would have established the Dog Breeder Accountability
Fund and imposed mandates on dog breeders, including requiring that every puppy be issued a birth certificate by the state.

What’s Hot … Mandatory Sterilization for Cats Proceeds to Hawaii Senate, while the Sterilization Requirements for Imported Dogs and Cats Bill Fails to Cross Over

 

Kelly Crouch, CFA Legislative Information Liaison

The mandatory cat sterilization requirement remains attached to the Hawaiian Spay and Neuter Special Fund Bill, HB 1736 HD2. After two amendments, the show cat exception was removed, only to be replaced by a mandate for intact cats over the age of five months to be covered by a $100 intact cat declaration filed with the applicable county animal control authority. The House passed the bill, and the Senate is now considering it. The bill was referred to the Agriculture and Environment, Energy and Intergovernmental Affairs, and Ways and Means Committees.

The Special Fund is a laudable method to provide counties with spaying and neutering funds to address the availability of affordable sterilization services to disadvantaged communities. Hawaii has several endangered species, and community cats and dogs are considered one of the dangers to ground-nesting birds, sea turtles, and Hawaiian Monk Seals (due to exposure to toxoplasmosis). Invasive species such as mongooses, rats, and mosquitoes also pose threats to native birds. The legislature should narrowly tailor any legislation to its purpose and address all threats to endangered species, including human activity. Piecemeal efforts will not save those endangered animals.

Yet, the bill unnecessarily ties punitive fees to owning intact cats. Not only are 80–90% of owned cats sterilized without such legislation, but generally, only two groups of people would own intact cats. This special fund helps low-income pet owners who cannot afford sterilization procedures. Punitive fees of $500 – $1,000 per cat do not help when people cannot afford the procedures in the first place. As intact cats exhibit unpleasant hormonal behaviors, making services available to this group will help reduce the number of unsterilized cats in these communities. Small in-home preservation breeders are the other people keeping intact cats. Breeders do not want their cats roaming the islands, mating with random-bred cats, and bringing home diseases that could destroy their breeding programs. Pedigreed cats make up only 3–5% of the cat population; they do not contribute to Hawaii’s community cat issues. Yet, this bill penalizes preservation breeders for a problem they do not cause. It also raises the question of whether local clubs could continue to produce cat shows, as the bill does not provide any exceptions for cats temporarily in the state.

In addition to penalizing pet owners, this bill puts the burden of enforcement on counties. Local governments are better positioned to assess their animal control needs than a one-size-fits-all plan that does more harm than good.

The Agriculture and Environment and Energy and Intergovernmental Affairs Committees have scheduled a hearing for House Bill 1736 HD2 on March 18, 2026, at 3:10 p.m. in Conference Room 224. Fanciers should oppose this bill as long as it contains the mandatory spay/neuter mandate. Testimony can be submitted online here.

Fortunately for cat and dog fanciers, Senate Bill 3012 failed to make the crossover deadline and is not expected to progress this legislative session. That bill mandated the sterilization of imported cats and dogs.

UPDATE 3/28/2026: After the Senate Agriculture and Environment Committee deferred HB 1736 HD2, proponents amended SB 1023 carried over from 2025. SB 1023 was replaced in its entirety by the language in HB 1736 HD2 and is now SB 1023 HD2. It has been referred to the House Finance Committee.

LEGIS ALERT AND UPDATE: Hawaii SB 3012, HB 1736-1, and HB 1594

 

Hawaiian fanciers need to speak up to avoid the creation of a breeder registry and mandatory spay/neuter for cats. The good news is that House Bill 1594 was deferred. Unfortunately, its companion bill, SB 3012,  has been scheduled for a hearing on Monday, February 9, 2026, at 4:00 p.m. The Hawaiian Humane Society has been pushing for anti-breeder legislation for several years in various ways. Fanciers need to help make sure the losing streak continues. Please OPPOSE both bills!

Senate Bill 3012 ( https://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/session/measure_indiv.aspx?billtype=SB&billnumber=3012&year=2026 ) would prohibit the importation of any intact cat or dog, and it shares the same objections as the deferred HB 1594. It includes an exception for cats and dogs imported by breeders registered with the Department of Agriculture and Biosecurity. The statute requires the agency to create a registry that, at a minimum, includes the breeder’s name, business address, and the species or breeds maintained. At first glance, that may not seem so bad; however, the agency could take it much farther. Bengals became illegal in Hawaii after that agency was given discretion to determine which animals would be prohibited in the state. This may not happen, but it is easier to amend an existing law or regulation than get a new one enacted. It is also a well-established strategy of animal rights groups to get anything passed and change it later to what they really want.

Further, when you combine the facts that most cats and dogs are sterilized and that people who cannot afford to sterilize their animals most likely cannot afford to live in Hawaii, this law makes no sense. Also, no Hawaiian show breeder can maintain genetic diversity over the long term without introducing new animals. Eventually, those will have to come from outside Hawaii. The rationale for this bill is to address rabies control and pet overpopulation. An animal’s breeding status has nothing to do with rabies control. Also, a breeder registry will do little to help with stray or feral cats and dogs. Pedigreed cats make up 3-5% of the cat population. There are also far more random-bred dogs than purebred dogs. It is not to the benefit of any show breeder to allow their animals to roam at large or contribute to the random-bred animal population. Pets placed by show breeders are typically sterilized prior to placement or are required to be sterilized under their contracts. They are not contributing to the problem! Why punish responsible breeders and burden the state with unnecessary regulation? If the “solution” does little to address the issue, why subject breeders to the expense of breeder registration and the risks associated with a publicly available registry? Fanciers can submit written testimony at the bill link above.

House Bill 1736-1 ( https://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/session/measure_indiv.aspx?billtype=HB&billnumber=1736&year=2026 ) would establish a spay/neuter fund for cat sterilizations and mandatory spay/neuter for cats. There are studies that early sterilization can be detrimental to both cats and dogs. Also, with the veterinary shortage experienced throughout the country, people often have to wait long periods before sterilization can be performed. Sixty days may not be sufficient, particularly if the owner relies on low-cost alternatives. And, while it includes an exception for cats registered with a breed registry, that too is problematic and unnecessary. The amended version of the exception reads:

“(3)  The owner of the cat can provide verifiable proof upon request by the applicable county animal control authority that the cat is approved by and registered with a national or international breed registry or association that, at minimum, requires verification of:

          (A)  Breed;

          (B)  Date of birth;

          (C)  Name of the registered sire and dam;

          (D)  Name of the breeder; and

          (E)  Other information related to breeding, transfer or ownership, and death.

     (c)  Any person violating this section shall be fined no less than $500 and no more than $1,000 per violation per cat.

     (d)  This section shall not apply to cats brought into the state exclusively for the purpose of entering the cats in a cat show or exhibition and not allowed to run at large.”

The amended version removes the requirement to show the cat. Still, this provision burdens cat breeders unnecessarily, may hinder the development of new breeds, while doing nothing to reduce the number of community cats. It is wholly unnecessary to the creation of a spay/neuter fund, which most breeders would support if it did not also make participating in their hobby more difficult. Pedigreed cat and purebred dog breeders are frequently involved in rescue efforts, either directly or through contributions. This benefits the state. Establishing a spay/neuter fund is a laudable goal and will do far more to reduce the number of community cats (or feral dogs) than mandatory spay/neuter. The fund will help people who cannot afford today’s veterinary costs and who would ignore such a law out of financial necessity, as well as people involved in community cat programs. Burdening breeders will not.

The Committee on Judiciary & Hawaiian Affairs has scheduled a hearing for HB 1736-1 on Tuesday, 02/10/2026, at 2:00 p.m.

We need all Hawaii fanciers to oppose these bills, especially with the support of the Hawaiian Humane Society, the Kauaʻi Humane Society, the Department of Land and Natural Resources, and the Animal Legal Defense Fund. Fanciers can submit their testimony online at the links above. If you can, attend the public hearings as well.

Kelly Crouch

CFA Legislative Information Liaison

You are the eyes, ears, and voice of the fancy!Is detrimental legislation happening in your area? Please let us know. Contact the CFA Legislative Group at legislation@cfa.org

LEGIS ALERT: Hawaii Considers MSN for cats, any cats and dogs imported into the state, and a breeder registry

 

Please act now! Testimony can be submitted on the bill web pages included below until 9 a.m. on 2/3/2026. If you can, please attend the hearing to submit written or oral testimony. On Wednesday, February 4, at 9 a.m., the Hawaii House Committee on Agriculture and Food Systems will hear HB 1594 and HB 1736, both of which could have devastating consequences for local fanciers. These bills were introduced to address the pet overpopulation and community cat issues. Both are supported by the Hawaiian Humane Society.

HB 1594 ( https://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/session/measure_indiv.aspx?billtype=HB&billnumber=1594 ) would require that all dogs and cats brought into the state be sterilized unless they are too infirm, are in the state for less than 90 days, or the importer is registered as a breeder with the department. In essence, this is a breeder registry for all breeders, as few breeders (in any state) can maintain a breeding program without occasionally bringing in animals from another state. 

HB 1736 ( https://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/session/measure_indiv.aspx?billtype=HB&billnumber=1736 ) would mandate that all cats five months of age or older be sterilized and prohibit any unsterilized cat from being imported into Hawaii, subject to certain exceptions. One exception applies to cats that meet the cat association registry and exhibition requirements. The bill would not apply to cats temporarily entering the state for the purpose of exhibition and cat shows.

Pedigreed cats make up only 3-5% of the cat population. They do not contribute to the random-bred community cat issues that Hawaii may be experiencing. Not only will these bills not address the issue as the proponents argue, but they will also be unnecessarily burdensome for the state and breeders alike.

Remote testimony guidelines can be found at chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/docs/RemoteTestimonyHouseGuidelines.pdf

Hawaii has a very short legislative session, so things tend to move very quickly and with little notice. Please contact the CFA Legislative Committee if you want to help defeat misguided legislation. You are the eyes, ears, and voice of the fancy! 

What’s Hot: Hobby Breeders Targeted in Missouri Bill …. and, in other news, Florida Pet Dealer Requirements may be Subject to Change

 

Kelly Crouch, CFA Legislative Information Liaison

Missouri regulates breeders, shelters, dealers, and pet shops under the 1992 Animal Care Facilities Act (AFCA). The proposed HB 2567 aims to redefine commercial and hobby breeders and remove the exemption benefiting hobby breeders, which could significantly affect their breeding programs.

If enacted, the commercial breeder definition would no longer exclude hobby or show breeders. Hobby breeders would no longer be limited to noncommercial breeders. The critical change for hobby breeders would be the repeal of §273.342 (2). This section of AFCA requires that hobby or show breeders register annually, but are exempt from the licensure and inspection requirements of §§ 273.325 – 373.357. Should HB 2567 be enacted, the only breeders exempt from the AFCA licensing requirements are those who harbor three or less intact females.

The Missouri legislative session runs from January 7 through May 30, 2026. House Bill 2567 had its first reading on the first day of the session. The second reading was held the next day, on January 8. Currently, there are no cosponsors. Fanciers can review and monitor the bill’s progress here. As a member of the cat fancy, your voice is vital to protect your cats and hobby from restrictive anti-breeder legislation!

In other news… Florida Pet Dealer Requirements may be Subject to Change

Fanciers, wherever located, who place pets in Florida will want to monitor Florida Senate Bill 1356 and the related bill, SB 1004. Not only would SB 1356 affect dog breeders if this latest attempt for more restrictive legislation is enacted, but both bills would also change the record-keeping and financing requirements for pet dealers. In Florida,  a pet dealer “means any person, firm, partnership, corporation, or other association which, in the ordinary course of business, engages in the sale of more than two litters, or 20 dogs or cats, per year, whichever is greater, to the public. This definition includes breeders of animals who sell such animals directly to a consumer.”

What’s Hot: California 2025 Session Laws:  The State Enacts Laws Affecting Breeders Selling to California Purchasers and a Cat Declaw Prohibition

 

November 4, 2025

Kelly Crouch, CFA Legislative Information Liaison

California lawmakers enacted new legislation affecting all breeders, not just pet dealers, as part of their ongoing effort to block “puppy, kitten, or rabbit mill” sales into the state. The campaign began with the 2017 retail pet store prohibition, which proponents claimed would end the mill pipeline into the state by prohibiting retail pet stores from selling cats, dogs, and rabbits. As pet stores could showcase these animals for rescues, some organizations set themselves up as rescues to sell their animals, forcing the state to redefine what constitutes a rescue in 2021. After that, lawmakers focused on the new trend of bad actors importing animals to sell under the pretense that they are California-bred animals offered by small home breeders. This led to the latest round of legislation enacted in 2025. The new requirements apply to all persons, pet dealers, or businesses when the purchaser is located in California.

Assembly Bill 506 mandates that the seller must provide written notice of the original source of the animal, identify the breeder, including the USDA license number when applicable, and the state in which the animal was born. If any information is unknown, the seller must clearly state that fact. The seller must also provide a record of inoculations, worming treatments, and any veterinary treatment of the animal while in the possession of the seller.

The bill also removes a tool many breeders use to ensure the buyer is committed to the purchase —the nonrefundable deposit. Section 122227 (a) makes a contract by a person, pet dealer, or business with a purchaser located in California that requires a nonrefundable deposit void under public policy. Breeders know that as a kitten ages, fewer buyers are available, which affects its price. A nonrefundable deposit not only indicates a commitment but also compensates the seller for a loss if the buyer backs out of the sale. The Lockyer-Polanco-Farr Pet Protection Act defines a pet dealer as “a person engaging in the business of selling dogs or cats, or both, at retail, and by virtue of the sales of dogs or cats is required to possess a permit pursuant to Section 6066 of the Revenue and Taxation Code.”

In addition to AB 506, lawmakers enacted AB 519, prohibiting brokers from making a dog under one year of age, a cat, or a rabbit for adoption or sale. A broker is defined as “a person or business that sells, arranges, negotiates, or processes, either in person or online, the sale of dogs, cats, or rabbits bred by another for profit. This includes facilitating the transfer of a dog, cat, or rabbit for profit.” [Emphasis added.] The term broker does not include an animal rescue group that meets the requirements of §122365 of that chapter.

Senate Bill 312 was also enacted to close gaps in the original Retail Pet store ban, but applies only to dogs. It requires persons importing dogs for resale or change of ownership to submit a health certificate completed by a licensed veterinarian to the California Department of Food and Agriculture.

Also enacted during the 2025 session was the cat declawing bill, AB 867. This law mandates that an onychectomy, tendonectomy, surgical claw removal, or declaw, or any procedure that alters a feline’s toes, claws, or paws, be performed for therapeutic purposes only. Nail trimming and “nonsurgical scratching mitigation solutions” are not prohibited.

What’s Hot: Boulder City, NV, Considers a Breeder Permit Ordinance More Restrictive Than Nevada Law Requires

 

August 19, 2025

Kelly Crouch, CFA Legislative Information Liaison

Boulder City, Nevada, is considering a breeder permit ordinance (https://www.bcnv.org/1105/Proposed-Pet-Breeding-Ordinance) mandating permits for anyone who breeds a cat or dog in the city limits. Nevada Revised Statutes (NRS) §574.353 requires all cities and counties, not limited by interlocal agreements, to adopt ordinances requiring annual breeder permits for commercial breeders. NRS §574.245 defines a breeder as “a dealer, operator or other person who is responsible for the operation of a commercial establishment engaged in the business of breeding dogs or cats for sale or trade. The term does not include a person who breeds dogs or cats as a hobby.” [Emphasis added.] It appears the city was unsure how restrictive it could be under state law.

The City Attorney requested an Opinion Letter (https://ag.nv.gov/uploadedFiles/agnvgov/Content/Publications/AGO%202025-02.pdf) about NRS 574.353 from the Office of the Nevada Attorney General. Specifically, the city Attorney asked if the law preempted city governments from banning breeding cats and dogs. If so, does the statute also preempt a city government from regulating hobby breeding of cats and dogs? The short answer is that while the city is preempted from prohibiting commercial animal breeding, there is no prohibition preventing a city government from banning or limiting animal breeding by hobby breeders in order to address a local concern. The Attorney General’s Opinion Letter goes on to say that a city is within its express statutory authority to regulate animal breeding to prevent animal cruelty. The Opinion Letter does not address whether there is a matter of local concern or animal cruelty that would enable Boulder City to institute such a ban consistent with its powers under state law.

As a result of that Opinion Letter, Boulder City is considering an amendment to its current animal control laws that would require every person who wishes to breed a cat or dog to obtain annual breeder permits and adhere to specified requirements, including but not limited to:

1. Meet zoning restrictions and, for dogs, space requirements;
2. Is subject to inspections and facility and care requirements;
3. Must have a business license and home occupation permit in addition to the breeder’s permit;
4. Keeps and maintains no more than three intact dogs or cats that are one year of age or older, provided the following conditions are met:
a. Each dog or cat is registered with a nationally recognized club or registry,
b. Each dog or cat being bred has a registered microchip and is up-to-date on its rabies vaccination, and
c. A dog or cat may not be bred until it is at least two years of age and may only have a litter every two years.

However, cats are not little dogs! Requiring that a cat be two years old and only have litters every two years endangers not only its reproductive capability but also its life. Deliberately endangering a cat runs counter to the animal welfare philosophy. Both cats and dogs are subject to reproductive problems due to repeated unbred heats. But while a female dog may have up to three cycles a year, some female cats may cycle as often as every three to four weeks. That’s up to 17 cycles per year and 34 cycles in two years, significantly increasing the risk of reproductive health issues in female cats.

Furthermore, the limitation of three intact animals does not allow the breeder to maintain a genetically diverse breeding program. Genetic diversity is crucial to a healthy population. This arbitrary cap guarantees hobby breeders will have difficulty maintaining adequate genetic diversity. This only hurts our pedigreed cats and purebred dogs and the people who buy them. It is hard to believe this is the intention of the city council.

As written, the proposed ordinance will require hobby breeders to meet all the requirements of commercial breeders. Breeding cats is not the primary full-time job for hobby breeders, most of whom work outside the home. It is not a livelihood; it is a passion that generally costs more money than it generates. Requiring a breeder’s permit, a business license, and a home occupation permit, along with all the other requirements for commercial breeders, is overkill for hobby breeders who dedicate time and money to producing and preserving healthy specimens of their chosen breed, and usually lose money doing it! Furthermore, pedigreed cats make up only three to five percent of the cat population in the country. Few pedigreed cats, or even mixes with pedigreed cats, will find themselves in local shelters. Treating hobby breeders the same as commercial breeders punishes the people who dedicate their time, knowledge, and bank accounts to producing quality cats. One-size legislation does not fit all!

To find out when the Boulder City Council will consider the ordinance, residents can monitor the council meeting agendas here (https://bcnv.primegov.com/public/portal/) and submit comments online (https://www.bcnv.org/FormCenter/Contact-Forms-3/City-Council-Comment-Form-111).

Scroll to Top