Natalie Wong

Professor Lynda Haas

Writing 39C

20 August 2015

Puppy Mills: Business of Exploitation

In the last few decades, the amount of dogs found in our households have become

increasingly prevalent as a result of a business more commonly known as puppy mills which mix

different breeds for specific characteristics or physical traits. According to United States

Department of Agriculture, there are at least 10,000 of these structures that mass-produce about

500,000 puppies per year across the United States today (The Humane Society of the United

States). Allotted to just six inches of moving space in a confined cage from birth, mothers are

constantly forced to reproduce until they are no longer capable of producing offspring. As a

consequence of these poor living conditions, mill puppies are fated with short lives from mental

and physical problems, so they are eventually given away and euthanized in animal shelters.

Owners of puppy mills completely dismiss the emotional capacities of dogs and see them simply

as cash crops. Given that humans have interfered with the dogs’ natural evolution and entwined

them into our lives as early as 10,000 years BP, we are responsible for them as a species and they

should not be treated as inanimate objects. Even though there are state and federal laws that

attempt to regulate puppy mills, majority of them are ineffective to breeders by definition and

working. In addition, enforcement programs cannot function without enough inspectors or

funding. Solutions to this problem include imposing laws that address the source that permits the

abominable puppy mills to continually thrive. In order to do so, utilizing social media will raise

the awareness of advocating for regulations of puppy mills to the public at the fastest rate.

Wong 1

A History of Dogs and Our Responsibilities for Them Today

Since the publication of The Origin of the Species by Charles Darwin in the 19th century,

the early theory of humans as the source behind the domestication of dogs was introduced.

According James Serpell, a Professor of Veterinary Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania,

the discovery of archaeological remains suggest that dogs have been domesticated as early as

14,000 years BP (10). In 1923, Julian Huxley, an evolutionary biologist and Secretary of the

Zoological Society of London, claimed “animals [to] have no brains [but] only soul” (Mitchell,

Thompson, and Miles 26). During this time, scientific studies of canine cognition or cognitive

ethology had not begun yet. Furthermore, according to Dr. Marc Bekoff, a researcher of animal

behavior and cognitive ethology at the University of Colorado, “researchers [at the time] were

almost all skeptics who spent their time wondering if […] animals felt anything” (xvii).

Although, scientists have only barely begun studying canine cognition and cognitive ethology,

this topic of study has changed dramatically over the past thirty years. As a researcher of animal

behavior and creator of cognitive ethology, Donald Griffin recognized in 1976 that “mental

experiences also include feelings, desires, fears, and ‘sensations’ such as pain, rage, and

affection” (Mitchell, Thompson, and miles 26). In Bekoff’s book The Emotional Lives of

Animals: A Leading Scientist Explores Animal Joy, Sorrow, and Empathy and Why They Matter,

he extends Griffin’s sentiment of mental experiences by commenting how emotions have

evolved as adaptations over time and serve as a social glue to bond animals with one another

(xviii).

One of the earliest experiments concerning animal cognition dates back to 1967; in this

study called “The First Learned Helplessness Experiment”, psychologists Christopher Peterson,

Steven Maier, and Martin Seligman, demonstrate that experience of emotions is indeed possible

Wong 2

for domesticated canines. In this highly unethical study, the canines are conditioned to accept the

shocks given to them with no way to escape; when the dogs habituate to the pain produced by the

given stimulus, the researcher provides the dogs with the same stimulus and an escape route, and

observe an emotional reaction. The dogs in the experiment, demonstrate the experience of

learned helplessness or the passive acceptance of certain circumstances, which is similar to the

diagnoses of depression in humans (Peterson, Maier, and Seligman 17-19). This experiment

plays a role in diverting scientists’ focus of animal cognition and animal ethology from why

emotions are felt to how they are felt. From this study, researchers are able to discover that our

primary emotions of “fear, anger, surprise, sadness, disgust, and joy” are made possible by the

limbic system and the amygdala (Peterson, Maier, and Seligman 91). In addition to finding that

both these structures are found in all mammals, humans and animals also share similar chemical

and neurobiological systems (Bekoff 10). These breakthrough discoveries are extremely

beneficial for this field of research by enabling researchers to take advantage in incorporating

animals into their experiments when attempting to study humans.

When archaeological evidences were first being discovered, scientists were unaware of

the role anthropomorphism and secondary emotions played in forming the first relationships

between humans and dogs. Serpell indicates in his finding, displayed in Figure 1, that humans

were still hunting, gathering, and foraging when animals were first domesticated, which dated

back to the end of the last Ice Age at 12,000 years BP (10). Secondary emotions involve

consciousness and thought processing in the cerebral cortex and are experienced after primary

emotions. They may be caused directly or from complex chains of thinking. For instance, when

one is fearful (primary emotion) of a threat, anger (secondary emotion) may ensue.

Wong 3

In 2008, Leslie Irvine, a professor of

sociology and researcher of animal-human

interactions demonstrate her agreement in

her book If You Tame Me: Understanding

Our Connection with Animals in 2008. In

order to explain human’s first encounter and

interaction with canines, she states, “that

animals were like humans in many ways,

but also different enough to be able to

explain and accomplish things that humans

could not” (Irvine 35). Besides seeing

animals as equals, our ancestors’ transition

into hunter-gatherers was made possible with

the aid of the early canines. Furthermore,

Irvine proposes three different theories as to why dogs were domesticated in her chapter entitled

“How and Why.”  The first two theories involve canines’ hunting and scavenging abilities, which

is beneficial to humans by offering a symbiotic relationship where both humans and canines live

together as well as commensalism, in which one species enjoys a benefit, and the other is not

significantly affected. Humans are not the only ones who profit, because the emotional aspect

formed between canines and humans stimulate the primary emotion of happiness for dogs (Irvine

14). Unlike the many independent animals we see, bears and tigers to name a couple, canines are

more receptive to humans and socializing as a result of the bond formed between canines and

humans. Lastly, Irvine emphasizes this by supporting the idea of human beings being drawn to

Fig 1. Burial of a human with a puppy. (Serpell 11).

Wong 4

specific physical and social traits by stating: “several biological and behavioral factors

predisposed dogs to fit easily within human groups” (14-15). Through Irvine’s study, we can see

that the emotional aspect allowed the strong bond between humans and dogs to form including

the launching of domestication of canines.

In conclusion, we are interconnected with dogs and have been for a very long time even

though researches and studies are still trying to discover more about the human-canine

relationship as well as canines’ cognitive abilities and emotional capacities. Canines have

successfully survived as an entire species, all thanks to the early evolvement and development of

the human-canine relationship at the end of the Pleistocene Epoch, 10,000 years BP. The

different physical and behavioral traits that appeal to everyone is not the only reason why the

human-canine relationships still remains, but also for canine’s willingness to interact and coexist

with humans. Although the rate of domesticating dogs and selective breeding purebred dogs is

thriving and increasing, why do we not consider the negative health effects of some of the traits

that certain breeds inherit? According to an article by Kristine Lacoste, a coordinator for Dogs on

Deployment in New Orleans, a lot of diseases and genetic problems are introduced, such as

blood disorders, skin problems, and cancer (2013). Based on this information, questions about

our treatment towards dogs come to the surface. Why are the unethical practices behind the

business of dog breeding and puppy mills ignored and disregarded? Since humans have

interfered with the dogs’ natural evolution, we are responsible for them as a species, and

ethically should not treat them as inanimate objects. Even after the studies of canine cognition

and canine ethology, making profit is of more importance than the thoughtless breeding and

brutal treatment of canine emotions, which is senseless. Although it is a presumptuous way of

Wong 5

thinking, some see humans as the sole reasons of canine’s survival up to today. Dogs should be

taken cared of and be ethically bred solely for human characteristic of morality.

Puppy Mills and Animal Shelters

Every year in the United States, puppy mills contribute to the overpopulation of pets with

the admission of eight million animals and the euthanization of 17 million animals according to

Joshua Frank, an executive director of the Foundation for Interdisciplinary Research and

Education Promoting Animal Welfare (108). The initiation of this pet supplying industry dates

back to World War II, where various schemes were used to trick consumers into buying inbred

dogs. During this time, the hard economic times led to the failure of conventional crops, so

farmers were desperate for alternatives and saw dogs as substitutes of crops, according to Kailey

Burger, a writer for the Washington University Journal of Law (265). As a result, established pet

shops began to sell dogs, the moral responsibilities were disregarded, and dogs were included as

commodities to breeders, who began to take advantage of producing dogs with certain physical

characteristics. However, Kathy Rudy, an Associate Professor of Ethics at Duke University,

addresses in her book Loving Animals, the short lives puppies have from inbreeding because of

the physical birth defects from damaged gene pools (52). In order to sell the puppies to

consumers, pet stores will use innocent names such as “Rainbow Ranch” or “Heaven’s Blessing

Kennel” (HSUS). The most information about the puppies, employees and owners of pet stores

often times know is about the breed which comes from a short pamphlet (Fumarola 263).

Furthermore, they attempt to fool consumers by putting up a façade of placing the healthy

puppies behind the windows, while the sick disregarded puppies are in the back in order to

maintain their public credibility.

Wong 6

As pet stores receive dogs for puppy mills, the unpurchased puppies are inevitably sent to

shelters, however they are not normal but rather afflicted puppies. In 2011, veterinarian Franklin

D. McMillan, conducted “The Harmful Effects of Puppy Mills on Breeding Dogs and Their

Puppies” which demonstrates that dogs from puppy mills have more health problems and exhibit

increase levels of fear and nervousness, less aggression and excitability, sensitivity to touch, and

compulsive behaviors. Once puppies are placed in animal shelters, they become more reclusive

and timid because of limited human interaction (McMillan). Furthermore, Alexandra

Protopopova, an Applied Animal Behavior Professor at the University of Florida, and Clive D.L.

Wynne, a Professor of Psychology at Arizona State University found in their study of “In-Kennel

Behavior Predicts Length of Stay in Shelter Dogs” that the change in behavior of seclusion only

keeps them in the shelter longer. As a result, a going of affected mill dogs are sent into animal

shelters, and they ultimately are euthanized because of their behavioral and mental conditions

only worsen, declining any chance of getting adopted. According to Protopopova and Wynne,

60% of admitted animals to shelters euthanized annually because animal shelters need to kill the

unadoptable dogs immediately in order to save space for adoptable ones. While animals’ pre-

determined short lives are lived in cycle of miserable conditions, their breeders are profiting as

much as $290,000 a year (ASPCA).

Although, there are laws to regulate problematic puppy mills in the United States, as

shown in Figure 2, the state and federal law prevent them from being enforced, because some are

not easy to support or enforce while some states with “lemon laws” protect consumers through

the signing of contracts that guarantee the health of the puppies. The Animal Welfare Act signed

in 1966 was designated to inspect breeders and oversee interstate transactions, but the standards

was only applied to animal dealers, which left breeders free from being convicted. According to

Wong 7

HSUS, only 96 inspectors

from the United States

Department of Agriculture

are expected to oversee the

thousands of puppy mills

nationwide as a result of the

lacking of funding for the

program that oversees puppy

mills. Since the federal level

has deficiencies in overseeing

puppy mills, states are able to

do as they please so breeders

take advantage in moving to

the states that will not easily

persecute them, such as

Missouri, the “Puppy Mill Capital” in the United States, which provides up to 40 percent of the

nation’s mill-bred dogs (Burger 265). Despite the various laws implemented through the federal

or state, many are not properly enforced without enough resources resulting in breeders freely

doing business and gaining monetary value.

Concerning the Root of the Problem With Law and Social Media

As mentioned earlier, aged federal laws such as the Animal Welfare Act of 1966 are

ineffectual, which is why new laws need to be proposed and implemented in order for

punishments to be enforced on puppy mills. Christina Widner, a writer for the San Joaquin

Wong 8

Agricultural Law Review, suggests a proposition on domestic animal breeding for California’s

puppy mills that can also be applicable to others throughout the United States. She focuses

bringing more attention and control on bigger facilities by suggesting having more inspections

and fess on breeders (Widner 234). At the same time, puppy mill enforcement can acquire

revenue so that programs can continue to overlook these facilities. Widner argues for employing

licensing fess on breeders in each puppy mill based on the size of litter produced (Widner 233).

In order to lower the amount of mistreatment of animals in overcrowded facilities, Widner

recommends an adequate solution by placing a cap to on breeders for the amounts of puppies that

can be sold (235).

Although the recommendations provided by Widner are adequate enough to enforce on

puppy mills, they do not address the efforts that need to be taken in order for laws to be

jumpstarted and enforced. According to Katherine C. Tushaus, a writer for the Drake Journal of

Agricultural Law, alternative solutions have been proposed in New South Wales of Australia,

such as the Animals (Regulation of Sales) Bill, which allows state recognized breeders to sell

animals as long responsibilities and regulations are followed. Under this bill, the root of the

puppy mill problem is addressed, rather than selling animals from puppy mills, pet stores can

only acquire animals from pet shelters. Although breeders’ income diminishes as a result of the

animals coming from animal shelters, the overpopulation issue caused by puppy mills can be

solved. In addition, the state can keep breeders in check by forcing the breeders to visit if they

want to continue to sell puppies (Tushaus 515). Tushaus follows this solution by explaining the

major developments United States will generate in the effort against puppy mills if they were to

establish a law similar to Australia’s. If pet stores shift their financial incentive to animal shelters

rather than puppy mills, breeders will no longer have to focus on optimizing their profits by only

Wong 9

confining puppies in enclosed spaces. Their business can continue to sell pets as long as they are

recognized by the state and obey the state regulations. Meanwhile, pet stores can concentrate on

selling care products for pets instead. Through this transition, people will concentrate in adopting

pets from animal shelters, and pet stores can be easily reported if they are to be selling pets

(Tushaus 516-517). In order for this solution to be effective, a bill must be passed in the United

States along with the collaboration effort of the agricultural and pet supply industry to lobby

against the selling of pets. Even though business may continue to sell animals and a bill may fail

after years of debate like the Animals (Regulation of Sales) Bill, the government and the people

can be aware of the issue of puppy mills that is occurring. As Tushaus states, a proposal similar

to this bill in the United States will establish a platform for the public to support and spread the

word of such animal cruelty in puppy mills, which can play a major role in demanding and

instituting laws towards this issue (518).

One of the best ways to bring awareness of puppy mills is through social media. With the

rapid expansion and improvement of the Internet and social media sites such as, Twitter,

Instagram, and Facebook, little effort needs to be applied in sharing ideas and news at the fastest

pace. As a Professor of Media at New York University, Clay Shirky describes social media in a

TEDTalk video as a vital platform and a profound tool of the 21st century, because it is not a

flimsy or intangible thing to be overlooked. About three and a half minutes into the video, Shirky

explains the importance of social media because it is able to distribute any type of information to

anyone at the quickest rate possible. In addition, the internet and social media provides a “many-

to-many pattern,” which is important in providing a reliable source for people to speak with one

another, collaborate, and discuss how they feel with others. There is no better way than to utilize

the Internet and social media in advocating and spreading awareness of puppy mill issues.

Wong 10

Conclusion

Ever since farmers substituted crops with dogs to acquire money in the 1940’s, the

business of puppy mills was established. However, this industry is more prevalent now because

consumers can easily be tricked into buying puppies from pet stores. The puppies produced by

breeding facilities end up being sold in pet store windows, and the ones left over end up being

given to animals shelters for euthanization. Bearing in mind with the long history humans have

with dogs, we must protect the dogs from these establishments to the best of our abilities by

developing, establishing, and enforcing laws towards the issue of puppy mills, similar to the

Animals (Regulation of Sales) Bill by New South Wales of Australia. In order for bills to be

effective in prohibiting the sale of animals to pet stores, the use of the Internet and social media

needs to be incorporated into the process of bringing education and awareness to the public. With

the continuing improvement of the Internet and social media, the public and advocacy groups

can collectively spread the word worldwide through social media outlets like Twitter, Instagram,

and Facebook. More attention can be gravitated towards the issue of puppy mills by utilizing this

type of platform to advocate for laws at the same time.

Wong 11

Works Cited

"Animals (Regulation of Sale) Bill 2008." Australian Veterinary Association. Web. 19 Aug.

2015.

<http://www.ava.com.au/node/1065>.

Bekoff, Marc. The Emotional Lives of Animals: A Leading Scientist Explores Animal Joy,

Sorrow, and Empathy--and Why They Matter. Novato, CA: New World Library, 2007.

Print.

Burger, Kailey A. "Solving the Problem of Puppy Mills: Why the Animal Welfare Movement's

Bark is Stronger than its Bite." Wash. UJL & Pol'y 43 (2013): 265.

Frank, Joshua. "An interactive model of human and companion animal dynamics: the ecology

and economics of dog overpopulation and the human costs of addressing the problem."

Human Ecology 32.1 (2004): 107-130. Print.

Fumarola, Adam J. "With Best Friends Like Us Who Needs Enemies--The Phenomenon of the

Puppy Mill, the Failure of Legal Regimes to Manage It, and the Positive Prospects of

Animal Rights." Buff. Envtl. LJ 6 (1998): 262-263.

Irvine, Leslie. If You Tame Me Understanding Our Connection with Animals. Philadelphia:

Temple UP, 20044. Print.

Wong 12

Lacoste, Kristine. "Common Health and Behavior Problems in Puppy Mill Dogs" Petful. 19 Feb.

2013. Web. 28 July 2015.

<http://www.petful.com/animal-welfare/puppy-mill-dog-health-problems/>.

McMillan, Franklin D. The Harmful Effects of Puppy Mills on Breeding Dogs and Their Puppies

(2011). Web. 10 Aug. 2015.

<http://www.animalsheltering.org/training-events/expo/expo-2012-archive/expo-2012-

speaker-portal/form-uploads/Harm-of-Puppy-Mills-Animal-Care-Expo-2012.pdf>.

Mitchell, Robert W., Nicholas S. Thompson, and H. Lyn Miles. Anthropomorphism, Anecdotes,

and Animals. Albany: State U of New York, 1997. Print.

Peterson, Christopher, Steven F. Maier, and Martin Seligman. Learned Helplessness: A Theory

for the Age of Personal Control. Oxford University Press, 1995. Web. 14 July 2015.

Protopopova, Alexandra, and Clive D.L. Wynne. "In-Kennel Behavior Predicts Length of Stay in

Shelter Dogs." Plos One 31 Dec. 2014. Web. 10 Aug. 2015.

Rudy, Kathy. "The Love of a Dog." Loving Animals: Toward a New Animal Advocacy.

Minneapolis: U of Minnesota, 2011. 29-71. Print.  

Seligman, Martin E., Steven F. Maier, and James H. Geer. "Alleviation of Learned Helplessness

In The Dog." Journal of Abnormal Psychology 73.3, Pt.1 (1968): 256-62. APA PsycNET.

Web. 7 May 2015.

Serpell, James. “Origins of the Dog: Domestication and Early History.” The Domestic Dog: Its

Evolution, Behaviour and Interactions with People. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1995. 8-

19. Print.

Shirky, Clay. “How Social Media Can Make History.” TED. 19 Aug. 2015.

Wong 13

<http://www.ted.com/talks/

clay_shirky_how_cellphones_twitter_facebook_can_make_history?language=en>.

The Humane Society of the United States. State Puppy Mill Laws. Digital image. The Humane

Society of the United States. Web. 10 Aug. 2015.

<

http://www.humanesociety.org/assets/pdfs/pets/puppy_mills/state_map_puppy_mill_laws

.JPG?credit=web_id359552774>.

The Humane Society of the United States. "A Horrible Hundred Selected Puppy Mills in the

United States." (2013). May 2013. Web. 10 Aug. 2015.

<http://www.humanesociety.org/assets/pdfs/pets/puppy_mills/100-puppy-mills-list.pdf>.

The Humane Society of the United States. "Get the Facts on Puppy Mills." Web. 10 Aug. 2015.

<http://animalrightscoalition.com/doc/puppy_mills_factsheet.pdf>.

Tushaus, Katherine C. "Don't Buy the Doggy in the Window: Ending the Cycle That Perpetuates

Commercial Breeding With Regulation of the Retail Pet Industry." Drake J. Agric. L. 14

(2009): 504-517.

Widner, Christina. "Channeling Cruella De Vil: An Exploration of Proposed and Ideal

Regulation on Domestic Animal Breeding in California." San Joaquin Agric. L. Rev. 20

(2010): 219.

Wong 14

Wong 15