Originally Published in: Dallas News
Published on:January 2024
Written By: Everton Bailey Jr. 

Animal welfare and traffic concerns are among reasons officials are considering a ban, but the city’s lone permitted operator says updated rules are the solution.

Horse on Dallas street in front of Adolphus Hotel. scontent-dfw5-1.xx.fbcdn.net

Horse-drawn carriage rides through downtown Dallas and other parts of the city could end soon if some elected officials and animal rights activists get their way against the owner of the city’s only permitted carriage company, who says he’s providing an in-demand service in a safe and humane way.

City Council members began publicly discussing a possible ban on horse-powered carriage rides in early December and will continue deliberating this year. A ban would put Dallas among the largest cities in the country to outlaw the rides, joining Chicago; Salt Lake City; Biloxi, Miss.; and other areas.

San Antonio, Philadelphia and New York City are among other cities where officials have recently proposed similar bans. The sight of a carriage horse collapsing on a Manhattan street in August 2022 and being hosed by police officers to cool down renewed calls for reforms in New York.

Dallas City Council member Adam Bazaldua, who chairs the council’s quality of life committee, said he supports an overall ban on horse-drawn carriages, citing concerns about street safety and the treatment of horses.

“I don’t think we should have a place for horses on our streets,” Bazaldua told The Dallas Morning News. “I think it’s inhumane for the animal. I think it’s overall dangerous for having safer streets.”

Bazaldua, who said his committee took up the issue after hearing concerns from residents, acknowledged that even if City Council ultimately adopts a ban, it is unclear how effectively Dallas could enforce it. He said he believes some carriages are operating without city-approved permits.

Others say an outright ban in Dallas would be too harsh and not reflective of working for the animals in the city. They say horse carriage rides have been in the Dallas-Fort Worth area since at least the 1980s to help commemorate events like weddings, funerals, parades and proms, and they provide a nostalgic charm that isn’t available all over the country.

Brian High, the owner of North Star Carriage, disputed claims that his horses are mistreated. He pointed to a series of city rules operators have to follow to ensure equine safety like eight-hour work limits and at least 12 hours rest for the horses, not working when the temperature is above 99 degrees, mandatory water breaks at least every two hours and examinations at least once every six months by a state- licensed veterinarian.

High said he’d rather work with the city to help update regulations, like lowering the temperature limit.

“A ban would put us out of business. Bottom line,” said High, who has overseen his business since 1996. His family owns and runs a ranch in Krum, more than 35 miles northwest of Dallas. He said he employs up to 40 people during Christmastime, the business’ busiest season, and uses a rotation of at least 10 horses.

“There are people who depend on these jobs, it’s an important part of their yearly income, and I hope that means something,” he said.

High said his horses and operators typically work five or six hours on the weekends and around three hours on weekdays.

“I know that people think that we work [the horses] forever, but that’s just inaccurate and wrong,” High said. “If we’re out four hours during the week, it’s been a busy, busy weeknight.”

High estimated his business takes part in around 300 engagements a year and about 150 weddings. He said people also hire the carriages for funerals along with making reservations and walk-up appointments in places like Dallas’ West End and the Klyde Warren Park area. He said they also operate in Highland Park and Plano.

Dallas’ aviation department oversees the regulation and enforcement of horse-drawn carriages, taxis, limos and other transportation-for-hire businesses. Patrick Carreno, the department’s director, said inspectors are proactive in enforcing city rules and estimates his office will update the City Council with more information on how the industry is
regulated as well as a plan to get community feedback on a possible ban in April.

“If this stays and is found to be of value to the city, we’ll make sure it’s regulated properly,” Carreno told The News. “Whether it does stay, that’s not a question for our department to answer. It’s more of what direction the City Council wants to go.”

Carreno told council members during a Dec. 5 quality of life committee meeting that his office knew of no record of any accidents involving North Star Carriage.

“We haven’t had any significant findings from the inspectors or complaints that have shown any significant violations at this time,” the aviation department director said during the meeting.

He said the city in the future may consider moving enforcement to the transportation department. Dallas’ aviation office took over transportation regulation from the code compliance office in 2016.

Gloria Carbajal, lead organizer for advocacy group Ban Horse Carriages Dallas, said she believes the city should enforce a ban sooner rather than later. She said she saw horses working in temperatures above 99 degrees this past summer and has seen carriages going up and down bike lanes.

Although she didn’t know of any incidents in Dallas leading to a horse or person being injured or killed, Carbajal said a ban would guarantee that doesn’t happen in the future.

“It’s just a tragedy waiting to happen,” said Carbajal. “These are animals working in unnatural conditions and surroundings, and I would think that is a liability for the city and the public.”

Jodie Wiederkehr, a Chicago-based animal rights activist who helped campaign to get horse-drawn carriages banned in Chicago and is aiding Carbajal’s group, said she doesn’t believe improved regulations will prevent any person or animal from getting hurt. She is also against any arguments that city tourism would take a hit from horse-drawn carriage rides going away. 

“Nobody is coming to Chicago or Dallas specifically to ride a horse carriage,” said Wiederkehr, executive director of the Partnership to Ban Horse Carriages Worldwide. “We have no desire to put people out of jobs. We just want to end a cruel and outdated activity.”

She said she hopes if a ban happens the city would work with any impacted businesses to offer incentives to displaced workers or help them transition to other tourism- related jobs. Wiederkehr said she helped reach out to horse rescues and sanctuaries in Chicago to secure new homes for animals after officials in that city approved a ban in 2020. She said she didn’t know of any of the three companies that were operating in Chicago at the time deciding to give up their horses to those groups.

“Only the owners of the horses have the ultimate say in what happens to them,” Wiederkehr said.

During the December quality of life committee meeting, some expressed skepticism about keeping horse carriage rides. They said they wanted more clarity on what benefit the activity provides the city, if alternatives like electric carriages should be considered instead and what the city is doing to make sure operators approved to work in places like Highland Park aren’t also drifting onto Dallas streets.

“I would say that I just think as a society, it may be time to just move beyond this,” said council member Gay Donnell Willis during the Dec. 5 meeting.

Council member Paul Ridley said he was opposed to a ban, saying he believed it added to the character and atmosphere of areas the carriages operate in and expressing concerns about the future of the horses if the businesses were outlawed.

“These horses have a purpose in life and that’s to work,” Ridley said during the meeting. “If we ban this operation, what’s going to happen to those horses? They’re probably going to be put down because they are expensive to maintain, and if they don’t generate income, there’s no motivation to keep them around.”

High said he wasn’t sure how likely a Dallas ban would be, but hoped his business had a chance to make its case for why it should stay on city streets.

“We bring a lot of benefits to this city like educating locals and nonlocals alike on Dallas’ history,” he said, “and all of that tradition goes away if you ban us.”

Elaine began her career in aviation and then spent decades in marketing. Her lifelong passion for animals brought great change to the city of Dallas and beyond. She served on the boards of directors for Garland Humane Society, the Humane Society of Greater Dallas, DFW Humane Society, and Weimaraner Rescue. But she was an activist at heart: protesting circus cruelty, puppy mills, and hunting of baby harp seals; helping end the sale of animals from the Dallas shelter to laboratories; and working to pass local and statewide laws protecting animals in Texas.   In July of 2000, she and other advocates founded Metroplex Animal Coalition (MAC), an alliance of over 50 nonprofit animal welfare-organizations working to save as many dog and cat lives as possible. Elaine served as President of MAC from 2000-2013. During that time, they successfully lobbied for the first significant changes to ordinances in decades, including mandatory spay/neuter; a ban on tethering; improved dangerous dog ordinances; and pet limits. From 2000-2013, MAC provided 19,104 low-cost surgeries to Dallas residents in underserved areas, convinced then Dallas Mayor Ron Kirk to officially declare February 27, 2001, as Spay Day, and became a founding partner in the Big Fix for Big D, a 3-year, 3 million dollar spay/neuter initiative.  She served on the City of Dallas Animal Shelter Commission from 2002-2004, helping launch a successful campaign to obtain $11.5M for construction of a new 52,000 square foot, state-of-the-art animal shelter to replace the City’s outdated, deteriorating, and overwhelmed facility built in the 1950s.

On May 1, 2013, the Metroplex Animal Coalition, Dallas Animal Advocates, and Dallas Companion Animal Project (DCAP) entered a ground-breaking merger to continue the public advocacy and industry collaboration Elaine was committed to. The merger brought the strength and resources of all three organizations together, moving forward as one to continue fighting to address the animal-related issues that resulted in the needless deaths of so many animals in Dallas.  

In the years that followed, Elaine was instrumental in creating DCAP's metroplex-wide pet resource listing and map, lost pet network, and a state-of-the-art online portal connecting corporate donors with animal welfare agencies. She helped secure community-focused grants for Pets For Life outreach and spay/neuter events and helped acquire funding for Dallas Animal Services' first volunteer and foster program.  

In 2016, THLN was lucky enough to convince Elaine to join our board as she wasn’t really “retired…retired.”  Elaine used her marketing expertise and graciously spearheaded the first and only rebranding of THLN and its logo. It came at a pivotal time when many other animal groups began working at the Capitol. Elaine held close ties with her elected officials and convinced one of them to bring a controversial bill at a time that we knew wouldn’t pass, but it brought education and awareness to dogs in Texas research facilities. Elaine helped pass numerous laws, but including the Animal Cruelty Enhancements law in which she created a THLN Animal Cruelty Awareness campaign that is still used today.

She was a loving wife, an avid gardener, a loyal friend, and a tireless voice for animals. Her big smile and vibrant personality will be missed by the many friends she made during a lifetime of activism. Our thoughts are with her husband, Mel.

Elaine was proud of her work but never failed to recognize those around her. “I'm part of something much bigger than myself or one group alone. We haven't changed the world (yet), we are truly moving forward, and what's more important - we are trying. I sleep better at night because we are still trying...but what's most important is that we are trying on a different level than ever before. That's why it's worth it!”   

Originally Published in: State Bar of Texas
Published on: December 2023
Written By: Shelby Bobosky and Randy Turner

Legislative Update

ANIMAL LAW

The 88th Texas Legislature made significant changes to existing laws and local ordinances that will change the trajectory of the animal law landscape for years to come.

Dog and Cat Breeder Bill
In 2011, Texas passed a law regulating large-scale cat and dog breeders titled the Dog or Cat Breeders Act, found in Chapter 802 of the Texas Occupations Code. While the 2011 law prevented animal cruelty at licensed facilities, loopholes allowed numerous large-scale breeders to avoid inspections and basic standards of care. SB 876 was passed this session, requiring breeders with five or more breeding females to be licensed. Previously, only breeders with 11 or more breeding females were regulated. According to a Texas Department of Licensing and Regulation, or TDLR, study, unlicensed breeding facilities are responsible for most cruelty and neglect complaints. SB 876, effective September 1, 2023, also removes the need to prove that a breeder sold 20 or more animals in a calendar year. This legislation will enable the Texas Licensed Breeders Law to oversee the industry as originally intended.

Trap-Neuter-Return Bill
In late 2022, confusion erupted over whether trap-neuter-return, or TNR, of unowned community cats should be considered “abandonment” under Section 42.092 et. seq. of the Texas Penal Code. TNR is widely regarded as a humane method of stabilizing the feral cat population by humanely trapping them, transporting them to veterinary clinics for sterilization and vaccination, and then tipping their ear as a sign they have been treated. TNR programs save thousands of Texas cats from euthanasia annually, and the prospect of prosecuting TNR providers for abandonment threatened to end successful programs across the state.

HB 3660, effective June 10, 2023, updates Section 42.092(a) of the Texas Penal Code by defining a “Trap-Neuter-Return Program” as a means of nonlethal population control and adding a defense to prosecution for returning TNR cats to their outdoor homes. As a result, the law now clearly distinguishes between abandoning an owned companion animal versus releasing a TNR cat. However, the unreasonable abandonment of an owned companion animal is still punishable by a fine of up to $4,000, jail time of up to a year, or both.

Fake Service Animals
In recent years, there has been a sharp increase in the number of non-disabled people misrepresenting their pet dogs as service animals so their pets can accompany them in public spaces. Increased incidents of pet dogs distracting or attacking service animals have diminished the quality of life for disabled people who rely on service animals to navigate daily life. After negative encounters with imposters, some businesses have denied legitimate service animals access to their establishments, and significant numbers of service dog teams have begun avoiding public spaces for fear of being accosted by untrained pets.

HB 4164, effective September 1, 2023, amends Section 121.006 of the Human Resources Code by clarifying the language describing a service animal and strengthening the penalties for misrepresenting an animal as a service animal when they are not specially trained to help a person with a disability. As a result of HB 4164, the fine for asserting an untrained pet is a service animal increases from $300 to $1,000, and the offender may be required to perform 30 hours of community service for organizations serving persons with disabilities.

Preemption of City Animal Ordinances
HB 2127, effective September 1, 2023, preempts Texas’ municipalities from regulating activity under several sections of the Texas code unless that authority is expressly granted under another statute. HB 2127 amends Chapter 229 of the Local Government Code by prohibiting municipalities from adopting or enforcing regulations concerning “the breeding, care, treatment, or sale of animals or animal products, including a veterinary practice, or the business’s transactions if the person operating that business holds a license for the business that is issued by the federal government or a state.” While HB 2127 bars local government from passing future ordinances of this type, pet store ordinances adopted before April 1, 2023, remain enforceable until a statewide law regulating pet store sales is passed.

Animal Abusers Prohibited From Owning Pets
As of May 2023, 39 states have laws commonly called “possession bans” to prohibit persons convicted of animal cruelty from owning companion animals for a fixed period of time. The most common length of time a person is prohibited from possessing animals after conviction is five years. Some states go so far as to limit the ability of offenders to work with or ever own a companion animal again. HB 598 amends Chapter 42 of the Texas Penal Code by adding Section 42.107, which makes it a crime for a person previously convicted of animal cruelty to possess a non-livestock animal (i.e., companion animals such as a cat or a dog) for a period of five years after conviction. HB 598 also enhances the penalty for repeat violations under Section 42.107 from a Class C misdemeanor to a Class B. HB 598, effective September 1, 2023, disrupts an offender’s access to animals for a significant period of time.

Right-to-Farm Laws
HJR 126, dubbed the “Right-to-Farm Amendment,” amends the Texas Constitution to enshrine a right to engage in commercial agricultural activities on private property inside city limits. HJR 126 includes raising livestock and poultry, harvesting timber, and managing wildlife, and this proposition will be on the November 7, 2023, Texas ballot. If a majority of voters approve the proposition to amend the Texas Constitution, cities will not be able to regain control over agricultural operations in their jurisdictions by amending or repealing state laws.

Even if the amendment falls short of the necessary votes to amend the Texas Constitution by adding a “right-to-farm,” the Legislature codified a “right-to-farm in the city” by passing HB 1750. Historically, Texas cities with populations of 5,000 or more could regulate agricultural operations in city limits, such as livestock and poultry operations, so long as those regulations did not contradict state law. If a city annexed territory with preexisting agricultural operations, the city could regulate those operations after demonstrating that the regulation was necessary to protect the public.

HB 1750, effective September 1, 2023, amends the Texas Agriculture Code so that the requirement for cities to prove local regulation is necessary to protect the public is no longer limited to the newly annexed territory. Instead, agricultural operations cannot be regulated locally unless the city health department issues a report showing the operation poses a dire hazard to people in the immediate vicinity and the city council passes a resolution authorizing the regulation. HB 1750 preempts cities’ ability to proactively prevent harm by requiring municipalities to show harm after the fact.

Regarding ordinances regulating the care of animals, HB 1750 preempts cities from passing or enforcing regulations that prohibit “generally accepted agricultural practices” for animals in agricultural operations. Instead, HB 1750 directs the Texas A&M AgriLife Extension Service to detail which practices are generally accepted in a forthcoming manual. Two provisions in HB 1750 are specific to companion animals. First, HB 1750 adds veterinary clinics to the list of businesses protected by the “right-to-farm” because they service agricultural operations. Second, HB 1750 prohibits cities from enforcing local tethering ordinances for dogs guarding livestock. HB 1750 does not invalidate SB 5, the Safe Outdoor Dogs Act passed in 2021. Like all other dogs tethered outdoors in Texas, livestock guard dogs must be provided adequate shelter and drinkable water and cannot be tethered by chains.

HB 2308 works with HB 1750 by limiting the circumstances under which agricultural operations can be sued. In particular, HB 2308, effective September 1, 2023, amends the Texas Agriculture Code so that parties bringing nuisance lawsuits against agricultural operations must show clear and convincing evidence of harm. If they lose in court, the party that brought the lawsuit must pay the operation’s attorneys’ fees and court costs. Additionally, a party must file the nuisance lawsuit within one year of the operation’s start date. Thus, agricultural operations in cities operating for more than a year cannot be sued for nuisances such as odor and runoff from animal waste or toxic chemicals.

Read the full article here. 

Shelters across the state are overflowing with puppies and kittens in need of loving families.

DALLAS, TX – The Texas Humane Legislation Network (THLN) is bringing public awareness to the overcapacity crisis in animal shelters across the state and encouraging prospective pet owners to adopt from Texas shelters and rescue groups as opposed to buying pets from online retailers or pet shops. “One of the most important reasons Texans should adopt this holiday season is to ensure they are not inadvertently supporting and endorsing commercial breeding facilities, better known as puppy mills, that supply pet stores and sell pets online,” said Shelby Bobosky, Executive Director of THLN. “Out-of-state puppy mills are breeding operations that house hundreds of dogs in deplorable living conditions without proper food, water, veterinary care, or human interaction.” The sole purpose of a puppy mill is to mass-produce puppies and sell them for monetary gain. There is no regard for the welfare of the breeding stock or the puppies that are produced. Puppies from puppy mills are often seriously ill, poorly socialized, and many times suffer from life-threatening congenital defects due to being poorly bred.  “By adopting a pet from your local shelter or rescue, you will free up space for another homeless animal to have the opportunity to find a forever home and relieve the pressure on shelters and rescues. Plus, shelter animals are already evaluated, vaccinated, treated for parasites, tested for life-threatening diseases, and micro-chipped,” concluded Bobosky.  To learn more or to schedule an interview, contact Cara Gustafson at 561-797-8267 or [email protected].

Originally Published in: Progress Times
Published on: November 07, 2023
Written By: Maria Ruiz

Texas Humane Legislative Network to propose animal advocacy chapter in RGV

Monday, the Texas Humane Legislative Network (THLN) will meet with local animal organizations at the McAllen Library to propose a chapter for animal welfare advocacy in the Rio Grande Valley. With administrations across Texas, THLN works to bring awareness to statewide and nationwide animal issues.

Shelby Bobosky, Executive Director of the Texas Humane Legislation Network, said that THLN promotes legislation and advocacy for the humane treatment of animals.

“We are the only Texas organization focusing on addressing animal welfare laws in the state,” said Bobosky, a Dallas native. “We are a 501(c)4, but we also have a 501(c)3 organization called the Texas Humane Network. The mission of the 501(c)3 is to promote the humane treatment of animals through education and training…the (c)4 passes the laws, and the (c)3 educates on the laws.”

Primarily volunteer-based, the organization has chapters in Austin, Tyler, El Paso, Houston, and Wichita Falls with dedicated supporters. According to Bobosky, local chapters “get political for animals.”

“Not only can they serve as a voice at the Texas Capitol, but they also can be the voice of thousands of animal welfare policies at a local level,” Bobosky said.

The THLN Executive Director said the organization is exploring and bringing a chapter to the Valley but says it is up to the citizens if it takes root.

Earlier this year, there was a humane lobby in Austin at the state capitol, where Bobosky and the THLN team saw an influx of animal rights activists from the Valley.

“I was incredibly impressed that so many animal lovers, advocates, and rescuers all came up from RGV to be a part of this lobby day,” said Bobosky. “That is where the idea copulated.”

The meeting discusses the logistics of a chapter and informs the public on recently passed animal laws and how they affect the community.

“The point is to educate on the new laws and really serve as a Q&A for questions related to animal laws,” Bobosky said.

Issues, such as puppies sold at pet stores, will be a roundtable topic at the meeting. The discussion of this topic comes a week after animal advocates protested against the Paws Paradise pet store in McAllen on October 28, 2023.

“In 2025, we plan to help support a bill that we feel will end cruel puppy mill practices in other states and truly slow down and, or, stop the puppy mill pipeline in Texas,” Bobosky passionately stated. “Many retail pet stores that are selling puppies in Texas force those puppies and kittens from out-of-state puppy mills.”

THLN recommends adopting or rescuing shelter animals or finding a responsible breeder if one is looking for a specific breed of cat or dog.

If cities adopt animal advocacy chapters, elected officials may provide proper funding to local shelters with overpopulation and handle issues such as animal cruelty  through increased education and awareness.

“We serve as a guide, but if the local elected officials want to hear from their constituents, then THLN employs in other areas. So, we think that RGV is right for a chapter, and we hope to facilitate one.”

Read the Full Article Here. 

The Big Cat Public Safety Act was enacted December 20, 2022, to end the private ownership of big cats as pets and prohibit exhibitors from allowing public contact with big cats, including cubs. It placed new restrictions on the commerce, breeding, possession, and use of certain big cat species. In order to continue to legally possess privately owned big cats, the Act required individuals or entities to register any big cat(s) that were in their possession before the date of enactment with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), unless another exception of the Act applies. This registration had to occur no later than June 18, 2023, which was 180 days after the date of enactment.  Now that registration is closed, click here to find the document that gives guidance for enforcement of the BCPSA.

Learn More About Guidance of Enforcement

The History of the Texas Dog or Cat Breeder Act

In 2011, the Texas Humane Legislation Network was instrumental in passing HB 1451, which licenses and regulates large-scale commercial dog and cat breeders.

The Dog and Cat Breeder Act provides basic protections for tens of thousands of dogs and cats confined and raised in large-scale breeding facilities by requiring humane housing and care standards and needed veterinary care.  The law is administered and enforced by the Texas Department of Licensing and Regulation and requires periodic inspections and annual veterinary care.

THLN's 2011 Victory

THLN knew that federal dog and cat breeding regulation was too broad and left too many loopholes in which unscrupulous breeders could evade regulation. Specifically, THLN fought hard to regulate large-scale commercial dog breeding operations that placed profit over the well-being of its animals. In 2011, The Texas Dog or Cat Breeder Act (also known as HB 1451) enabled regulation to ensure that facilities that breed dogs and cats for sale in Texas provide a minimum standard of care for their animals. It acknowledged that many commercial breeding facilities do not provide adequate and humane care for the animals they are breeding and often fail to keep animals properly sheltered or to provide adequate veterinary attention.

During its 2011 session, the 82nd Texas legislature passed HB 1451 in the Texas House and Senate, and Governor Rick Perry signed the bill into law on June 17, 2011. The Act requires a person acting as a dog or cat breeder to obtain licensure by the Texas Department of Licensing and Regulation (TDLR).

Senate Bill 876 – THLN Strengthens the Texas Dog or Cat Breeders Act 

In the 2023 Legislative Session, THLN helped strengthen the Texas Dog or Cat Breeders Act.  While the 2011 law successfully prevented animal cruelty at licensed facilities, loopholes allowed numerous large-scale breeders to avoid inspections and meet basic standards of care, by 2023, it was clear: the Texas Licensed Breeders Law needed reform to regulate commercial breeders masquerading as hobbyists.

SB 876 requires breeders with five or more breeding females to be licensed. Previously, only breeders with eleven or more breeding females were regulated, which meant a large swath of the industry went sight unseen. According to a Texas Department of Licensing and Regulation (TDLR) study, unlicensed breeding facilities are responsible for the majority of cruelty and neglect complaints.  SB 876 also removes the need to prove a breeder sold 20 or more animals in a calendar year. Many breeders conduct cash-only sales, which are untraceable. By removing the “proof of sales” requirement, SB 876 closes a significant loophole that allowed commercial breeders to evade accountability. This legislation will effectuate change for thousands of animals across the state and allow the Texas Licensed Breeders Law to oversee the industry as originally intended.

SB 876 was authored by Representative Brad Buckley and co-authored by Senator Pete Flores and Senator John Whitmire. SB 876 is effective September 1, 2023, and breeders with five or more breeding females must be licensed by January 1, 2024.

UPDATE:  Between now and January 1, 2024, THLN needs YOU to ensure the rules associated with these changes to the Texas Dog or Cat Breeders Act do not allow loopholes for breeders to avoid licensure.  STAY TUNED and continue looking for additional updates throughout the rule-making process!

About the Legislation HB 1451 The Dog and Cat Breeder Act Bill Caption: Relating to the licensing and regulation of certain dog and cat breeders; providing penalties. Effective Immediately on: June 17, 2011 Authors: Thompson | Pitts | Rodriguez, Eddie | Lucio III | Branch Coauthors: Hartnett | Johnson | King, Phil | Laubenberg | MarquezSponsor: Whitmire Cosponsor: Ellis Read more about this bill

Texas Law Specifies the Responsibilities and Standards of Care for Dog and Cat Breeders

Licensed Breeder Responsibilities Timely license renewal annually; Prominently display a copy of the license at the breeder’s facility;  Maintain a copy of the breeders’ rules at each facility; Include the license number in each advertisement of the licensed breeder, and may not engage in false, misleading, or deceptive advertising; Include in each contract for the sale or transfer of an animal by the licensed breeder: the license number and the following statement: “Dog and cat breeders are regulated by the Texas Department of Licensing and Regulation, P.O. Box 12157, Austin, Texas 78711, 1-800-803-9202, 512-463-6599, www.tdlr.texas.gov”; Submit an annual inventory, giving an accounting of all animals held at the facility at any time during the preceding calendar year for each facility; Maintain a separate record for each animal in the breeder’s facility documenting the animal’s care, and these records must be on file at the licensed facility for at least two years; and Ensure that each breeding facility follows all standards of care the department sets.

What are the basic standards of care required by Texas Law? Title 16 sections 91.100–.113 of the Texas Administrative Code provide comprehensive rules that regulate the standards of care for: indoor, outdoor, and sheltered housing facilities, primary enclosures,  compatible grouping of animals,  exercise for dogs,  feeding and watering of the animals,  cleaning, sanitation, housekeeping, pest control, onsite personnel, grooming, veterinary care, sales, and transfers. Failure to abide by these rules may result in administrative penalties, including fines, suspension, revocation, or both.

Ongoing Enforcement of Dog and Cat Breeders in Texas

Enforcement and Activity

The TDLR derives its authority to enforce license breeder regulation from the Texas Administrative Code, chapters 51 and 802, and associated rules. If a person violates Chapter 802 or a rule adopted under it, they are subject to any action or penalty under subchapter F or G of Chapter 51.99. In addition, the TDLR has the right to enter the premises of a licensed breeder to conduct complaint-driven investigations and periodic compliance inspections.*

See Tex. Occ. Code §§ 51.351, 802.062 and 802.063.101

Prosecution

After the inspection or investigation is complete, the inspector or investigator submits a detailed report of the facts to the prosecuting attorney. The attorney then proceeds, as described below to determine the appropriate resolution of the case. 

In all cases, the prosecutor decides how the case will be resolved. If the prosecutor determines that formal enforcement action is not warranted due to insufficient evidence or other reasons, they will close the case informally by issuing a closing letter. They may also give a warning letter to the respondent, recommending that they come into compliance with the applicable law. 

To proceed with formal enforcement action, the prosecutor issues a Notice of Alleged Violation (NOAV) seeking administrative penalties and possible sanctions against the respondent’s license. An administrative penalty is a monetary fine paid by the respondent to the State of Texas. A sanction is an action upon the respondent’s license and may include suspension, probation, a written reprimand, or outright revocation of the license. Administrative penalties and sanctions applicable to specific violations within each TDLR program are reflected in the TDLR Enforcement Plan.

Roadside Sales of Live Animals 

Roadside sales of dogs and cats occur on the side of the road and parking lots. These sales rely on “impulse buying" without regard to the follow-through care animals need. Sellers offer no guidelines about needed care or problems with some breeds. Additionally, because the sellers “are here today, gone tomorrow,” there is no recourse available for dissatisfied customers while being able to skirt specific tax laws.

At least five states (California, Nevada, Virginia, Illinois, and Nebraska) have state laws that regulate roadside sale of animals in some way. Some laws enact comprehensive restrictions, while others are limited to specific animals or impose only procedural requirements.

The increasing popularity of roadside sales of dogs and cats also creates various safety issues. Pedestrian traffic on the roadside, as well as the frequent stops of vehicular traffic, can be very dangerous. These vendors can create traffic and other safety issues while encroaching on rights-of-way.

Some states prohibit the sale of animals on streets, highways, and boardwalks. See, e.g., CAL. PENAL CODE § 597.4 (West). In other words, they prohibit the sale of animals in public spaces. 

Laws About Roadside Sales of Live Animals in Texas

Austin, Dallas, Houston, and San Antonio ban roadside sales of dogs and cats.

However, sellers go to the counties next to these cities; therefore, a statewide ban is necessary. Many of these are not from Texas but from surrounding states due to the lax requirements on dogs and cats being transferred into the state to sell the animals.

What can you do to stop the sale of animals in parking lots and along the road? 

• Safely take pictures that are date stamped to include license plates, animals, and the price of animals being sold. Do not attempt to address the person[s] on your own.

• Notify the police, code compliance, or animal services if they are within the vicinity (especially if they are in a dangerous location to attract attention).

• Notify the businesses where the animals are being sold.
  • Notify the store managers;
  • Ask if their security can ask the vendor to be removed.
    
    
    

2023 Federal Legislative Priorities:

Fight Inhumane Gambling and High-Risk Animal Trafficking (FIGHT) Act H.R. 2742, known as the Fight Inhumane Gambling and High-Risk Animal Trafficking (FIGHT) Act is a high priority for THLN. This bipartisan bill aims to crack down on illegal cockfighting and dogfighting by banning simulcasting of fights, stopping the shipment of animals to fighting operations, allowing citizens to sue animal fighters, and enhancing law enforcement’s ability to seize valuable assets. ISSUE: Although rooster and dog fighting are illegal in all US states and territories, the advent of simulcasting has allowed the global animal-fighting industry to flourish. Cockfighting thrives in Southeast Asia, as well as in Mexico. Currently, it is not illegal for US spectators to watch or place bets on live and recorded animal fights staged abroad. In addition to profits from gambling on simulcast fights, cockfighting enthusiasts profit from breeding and shipping animals, particularly roosters, across the globe. Neighboring state Oklahoma, considered the cockfighting capital of the US, shipped over 5,100 roosters to Guam between 2019 and 2022. Despite the fact cockfighting is a felony punishable by jail time in Texas, the practice persists right here in the Lone Star State. Between 2020 and 2022, authorities arrested cockfighters in seventeen Texas counties stretching across fourteen of Texas’ thirty-eight US Congressional districts. While several hundred birds were seized, Texas law enforcement officials lament that prosecuting cockfighters for animal cruelty isn’t enough to stop the organized crime rings from flouting the law. Apart from their vicious treatment of roosters and dogs, animal fighters are notorious for engaging in a wide array of illicit activities, including human trafficking, money laundering and illegal arms sales. Still, enforcement of animal fighting laws is lax in some states. Shockingly, in recent years, legislators in other states have attempted to lower the penalties for animal fighting or decriminalize it altogether. Above and beyond the barbarity of forcing animals to fight to their death, animal fighting presents serious public health risks. Diseases such as avian flu spread easily from cockfighting operations to chickens grown for food. An epidemic of Newcastle disease in California from 2002-2003 was spread by cockfighting roosters immune to the fatal virus, and a massive outbreak in 2018-2020 caused the deaths of 16 million birds and $1 billion in containment costs. Similarly, H5N1 bird flu emerged in Asia in the early 2000s and spread via cockfighting. Human health could be seriously impacted if H5N1 were to mutate into a strain transmissible from human to human. SOLUTION: H.R. 2742, known as the FIGHT Act, will crack down on cockfighting and dogfighting. The Act will: · Ban simulcasting and gambling on animal fights. · Prohibit the shipment of mature roosters through U.S. mail. · Create a civil lawsuit provision allowing citizens to sue illegal animal fighters. · Allow authorities to seize real property for animal fighting crimes.

House Resolution 3709 - Microchip Funding THLN supports H.R. 3709 which will direct the USDA to enter into cooperative agreements with animal shelters and humane societies to fund microchipping of shelter dogs and cats. The legislation was filed in late May of 2023 and was referred to the House Agriculture Committee. Not many details about the legislation are available yet. But the benefits of microchipping pets are well known. Consider the following statistics from an American Veterinary Medical Association study published in the AVMA Journal: · One in three pets will become lost at some point during their lifetime. · Microchipping pets increases their chances they’ll be reunited with their families by orders of magnitude. Approximately 22% of lost dogs that enter shelters are reunited with their families. That rate of return jumps up to 52% for microchipped dogs, a 238% percent increase. · Less than 2% of lost cats that enter animal shelters are reunited with their families, but the rate of return for microchipped cats is more than 38% which is a 2,000% increase.

House Resolution 3957 - The Providing of Unhoused People with Pets Act (PUPP) By providing better accommodations for people experiencing homelessness who have pets, the PUPP Act will help remove a common barrier to shelter and services for vulnerable veterans, individuals, and families who gain strength from their companion animals. Pets play a pivotal role in the lives of their human caregivers, regardless of their income level or housing situation. Pets have public health benefits at nearly every stage of life, including lower blood pressure, lower risk of heart disease, reduced stress levels, decreased anxiety and depression, strengthened immune systems, and increased physical activity. Animals can be especially important companions for people experiencing housing instability. Studies have shown that people experiencing homelessness report that their pets provide a sense of responsibility and are a reason to live, reduce substance use, and seek healthcare. In 2022, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) counted over 582,000 Americans experiencing homelessness, including sheltered and unsheltered individuals. An estimated 12% of people experiencing homelessness have pets.   Currently, most emergency shelters do not accept pets – forcing individuals experiencing homelessness to choose between access to shelter and essential services or keeping their beloved pets. In most cases, individuals will refuse assistance and shelter if it comes with the condition of giving up a beloved pet. This scenario harms individuals’ well-being and contributes to the cycle of chronic homelessness. The PUPP Act offers a solution by creating a grant program – operated by the U.S. Department of Agriculture in consultation with HUD – to provide funds to eligible entities, enabling emergency shelters to make the necessary changes to accommodate unhoused individuals with pets, including providing basic veterinary services. The program is modeled on the highly successful California Pet Assistance and Support Program. Over two grant cycles, the state of California has allocated $15 million in small grants to nonprofit shelter operators to retrofit their facilities to accommodate pets. Both cycles were oversubscribed two to one, demonstrating the great interest and need for such accommodations. Feedback from grantees demonstrated that the investments allow the facilities to not just provide the necessary retrofitting, but also to provide support to both the owners and pets to ensure the long-term success of each in permanent housing. The California model demonstrates that a relatively modest amount of investment can make a big difference in the lives of those experiencing emergency housing needs, and ultimately save lives.

If you have any questions about these laws, please email [email protected].

Originally Published in: San Antonio Express-News
Published on: September 14, 2023
Written By: Cathy M Rosenthal

Three new animal welfare bills passed in this year’s state legislative session and are now laws in Texas as of Sept. 1.

Decades of research have shown a connection in people between cruelty to animals and later violence toward humans. House Bill 598 makes it a crime for a person convicted of animal cruelty to possess or live with an animal for up to five years from conviction, and it enhances the punishment for repeat offenders. It’s a Class C misdemeanor punishable by up to a $500 fine, and a Class B misdemeanor for repeat offenders with up to 180 days in jail and a $2,000 fine.

While the punishments could be more stringent for these crimes, said Shelby Bobosky, executive director of the Texas Humane Legislation Network, “It is a first step toward interrupting the cycle of abuse at its earliest stages and making Texas safer for our communities.”

Senate Bill 876 answers some prayers for those fighting to close loopholes in commercial dog- and cat-breeding operations.

It previously defined a breeder as someone who owns 11 or more adult unspayed female dogs or cats. The new law now requires someone who owns five unspayed female dogs and cats, and who “is engaged in the business of breeding those animals for direct or indirect sales” to have a license to operate under the Occupations Code of Texas.

If you have been trying to pass off your animal as a service animal, it’s not only a crime, but the fines for it have tripled in Texas.

HB 4164 redefines a service animal as one specially trained to assist a person with a disability. If your pet has not received this specialty training and you knowingly or intentionally represent your pet as an assistance animal, you can be subject to a fine of up to $1,000 and 30 hours of community service at organizations serving people with
disabilities.

While not among the big three for animals, HB 4069 requires financial transparency for pet owners seeking emergency care for their pets.

Prior to treatment, veterinary clinics now must disclose treatment prices for a sick or injured pet before services are rendered. In other words, you won’t be surprised by the emergency room bill at the end of the visit.

Read the full article >

Originally Published in: KHOU 11
Published on: September 4, 2023
Written By: Michelle Homer, Janelle Bludau

Originally Published in: The Texas Tribune
Published on: September 8, 2023
Written By: Ali Juell

New Texas law bars animal cruelty offenders from owning animals for five years

Texas lawmakers are making it harder for those convicted of animal cruelty to own any animals – at least for the next five years after their initial offense.

The animal possession ban or House Bill 598, authored by state Rep. Matt Shaheen, R-Plano, applies to people convicted of being involved in dogfighting operations, but also those who hurt an assistance animal or are found to be cruel to a non-livestock animal under Texas penal code or similar penal codes in other states and at the federal level.

Offenders are still able to live in the same household as animals. Shaheen said there is no exemption for offenders to own assistance animals during that five-year period nor would he support it.

“We need to make sure that our animals are taken care of,” Shaheen said. “We're not going to tolerate any type of animal abuse.”

If an offender is found to have an animal during those five years, they could be charged with a Class C misdemeanor, or as much as a $500 fine. If the offender is repeatedly in possession of an animal, the charge is raised to a Class B misdemeanor, increasing the possible fine to $2,000 and adding the possibility of up to 180 days in jail.

Shaheen failed to pass a similar animal cruelty prevention bill during the 2021 legislative session, but he said he reintroduced the bill because of calls from his constituents, who were largely surprised a possession ban didn’t already exist.

The law went into effect Friday, one of 774 bills passed by the Texas Legislature this session.

Even though animal cruelty is a very rare problem, Shaheen said it’s important to identify offenders to prevent future violence.

In many cases of animal cruelty, perpetrators are likely to recommit an offense, sometimes immediately after their last criminal case’s conclusion, said Shelby Bobosky, executive director of the Texas Humane Legislation Network, who is also an adjunct professor of animal law and wildlife law at Southern Methodist University’s Dedman School of Law.

“Possession bans are one of the most effective ways to ensure that a person convicted of animal cruelty does not reoffend,” Bobosky said.

Wayne Pacelle, founder and president of Washington D.C.-based Animal Wellness Action, said acts of cruelty such as animal abuse are an indicator of “a broader loss of empathy for others” and creates a need for post-conviction attention from law enforcement.

“Possessing a pet or other animal in the household or on their property is a privilege and not a right,” Pacelle said in an email.

Read the full article >

Originally Published in: The Kerrville Daily Times
Published on: September 13, 2023
Written By: Nancy Foster

Three animal-related bills passed the 88th Texas Legislature Session this year and are now in place as of Sept. 1. In an effort to educate the public on what these bills mean — as well as what is left to be done — two Hill Country organizations will come together to present the facts.

Kerrville Pets Alive! will host a presentation from 6 to 8 p.m. Monday, Sept. 18, at the Hill Country Youth Event Center, led by Shelby Bobosky, executive director of the Austin-based Texas Humane Legislation Network.

Read the full article >

THLN’s Priority Agenda for the 2025 Texas Legislative Session

In 2025, THLN plans to support a bill that will help put an end to cruel puppy mill practices and protect both pets and consumers by requiring that only healthy animals sourced from shelters and rescues be sold in retail pet stores. Currently, many retail pet stores source their puppies and kittens from unscrupulous, out-of-state puppy mills.

Out-of-state puppy mills store puppies in poor conditions, take them away from their moms too soon, and truck them hundreds or thousands of miles across the country to be sold in retail pet stores and there’s a reason why only one of the top 25 retailers still sells dogs from these conditions. This year alone, Dallas, Houston, and New Braunfels passed humane pet store ordinances, demonstrating the need and support for a statewide law. While 17 cities across Texas have passed retail pet store ordinances, millions of Texans are still vulnerable to the deceptive business practices used to sell puppies sourced from inhumane puppy mills. All Texans deserve to be protected from buying sick, defective puppies.

During the 2023 legislative session, the bill received huge bipartisan support but ultimately couldn’t get past the finish line before the session ended.

Be sure to sign up for action alerts for the upcoming session! 

Sign up for Action Alerts

THIS LAW WILL STOP THE PUPPY MILL PIPELINE TO TEXAS.

What is The Puppy Mill Pipeline to Texas?

The Puppy Mill Pipeline to Texas. Puppy mill breeders in other states rely on Texas retail pet stores to present a clean, spotless store with a happy puppy. Customers don’t think about where puppies are born, where the breeding dogs are kept, or how they are treated. We prop up this puppy pipeline by allowing puppy mill puppies to be sold in Texas. Here is what happens: a puppy broker (a middleman who obtains puppies in bulk from commercial breeders and is responsible for transporting the puppies to the retail store) buys puppies and re-sells the puppies to retailers. A cargo van picks up the puppies (holding up to 150), drives thousands of miles to Texas from Nebraska, Missouri, Ohio, and elsewhere, and goes to one store and the next until all the puppies are dropped off. Despite these puppy brokers trucking puppies over long distances to their final retail destinations, there is no limit to the number of continuous hours puppies may be trucked or how many puppies may be packed into one cargo van. A puppy only needs to be offered food and water once every 12 hours, and the driver is not required to have any animal care experience. Young puppies with underdeveloped immune systems spending hours or days in a dirty (urine and feces-soaked), confined cargo truck can significantly stress their immune systems, resulting in disease transmission or worse. Former pet store employees disclose that retail pet store owners don’t want their profits used up on vet bills, so these puppies don’t get better. They are sold to the unassuming public, and this is why so many people go home with a puppy that might have parvo, distemper, giardia, campylobacter, and so on. Unsuspecting Texans buy these puppies, become attached, and are soon faced with crushing vet bills and the potential death of their new pet. If the puppies aren’t sick, they can quickly develop behavioral issues. The puppies are sitting in glass boxes at nine, ten, and eleven weeks old, not being socialized.

Predatory Financing

Unfair lending practices, unscrupulous balloon payments, or immediate vet bills from a sick puppy.

The story is always the same. A consumer unwittingly purchases a seriously ill dog through a loan with an interest rate as high as 189%. The consumer is put in a room where they sit with a puppy, and it’s love at first sight. Then, the price is disclosed, and adding taxes, a supply kit and other add-ons can cost thousands of dollars. The consumer puts down a small deposit, and, with the help of the staff, the consumer signs an agreement financing the rest of the purchase through a loan or possibly two. It’s never disclosed that interest rates can balloon if they do not pay off the loan within ninety days. The documents placed before the consumer are irrelevant to them, as the focus is on the puppy. In addition, they do not know the puppy has serious health problems that would lead to multiple costly veterinary trips that would impact their ability to pay off the loan.

Here are some examples:

— A New Jersey consumer who bought a cocker spaniel was charged 152% interest, five times the legal limit of 30% in New Jersey.

— A Georgia consumer complained that the pet store didn’t tell her EasyPay’s finance charges amounted to an interest rate of 180%. “My puppy was supposed to cost $2,500 (and) now costs almost $7,000.”

— A Florida consumer said he was left with damaged credit after buying a puppy that immediately fell ill and eventually died. “I only borrowed $2,200 … I owe $5,500 on my credit report due to interest,” the consumer complained.

And when the puppy dies, the collection companies continue to call.

In 2019 and 2021, a bill was introduced in Congress to provide a permanent, national solution to the “rent-a-bank” issue by establishing a 36% interest rate cap that would apply to all lenders. But that proposal has faced stiff opposition from the finance industry and has yet to be approved by Congress.

Jurisdictions that have passed a Humane Pet Store Bill.

Seven states have stopped the sale of puppies in pet stores, including Washington, Oregon, Illinois, New York, Maine, Vermont, California, and Maryland. Currently, Michigan, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and Massachusetts are in the process of passing these laws.

The City of Albuquerque, New Mexico, in 2006, was the first ordinance that stopped the sale of puppies in pet stores. Currently, 471 cities have passed these ordinances, including the following stores from Texas: Austin, College Station, Dallas, El Paso, Euless, Fort Worth, Houston, New Braunfels, San Antonio, Sherman, and Waco. THLN and our grassroots nation were instrumental in many of these victories.

Dallas On May 11, 2022, the city of Dallas passed the Humane Pet Store Ordinance unanimously. Out of 33 pet stores, only one – Dallas Petland - was out of compliance with this potential ordinance and selling puppies. In 2020, this pet store imported 1,348 dogs from out-of-state puppy millers (Source: Bailing Out Benji). Once the ordinance passed, the city of Dallas was sued, and the lawsuit stated that the law was unconstitutional. Not one pet store has won a case trying to invalidate a Humane pet store ordinance. All 22 local, state, and federal lawsuits have failed. As in this example, the lawsuit was tossed out, and Dallas Petland closed its doors soon after.

Houston THLN and local advocates passed a Humane Pet Store law on January 18, 2022, and Houston gave the pet stores one year to comply. During that time, Houston Petland targeted this ordinance to reverse the ban on selling puppies in pet stores by either being grandfathered in or regulated, but ultimately failed. As of January 18, 2023, puppies may no longer be sold in Houston Pet stores (but they are available for adoption through animal shelters and rescues (i.e., humanely sourced). Houston pet stores that do not comply are subject to a fine of $500 per puppy per day. Six stores either moved or became compliant, but one refused to follow the law. On August 3, 2023, Petland Bellaire failed to appear in court, and a warrant was issued. Stay tuned for updates on the Houston Petland case!

The work that THLN and other grassroots activists have done at the local level is a tremendous momentum builder for Texas to be the eighth state to pass this law.

*          *          *

History of the Humane Pet Store Bill

*          *          *

WE NEED YOU!

The bottom line is that these puppies are only being used for profit. Please contact us at [email protected] if you want to get more involved in passing this bill and making Texas the eighth state to end the sale of puppy mill puppies in Texas pet stores and help us shut down the puppy mill pipeline!

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Originally Published by: KTRE
Published on: August 17, 2023
Written By: Tyre White

Read the article and watch the news clip > 

NACOGDOCHES, Texas (KTRE) - A new law will make it illegal for people with animal cruelty convictions to have a pet or live in a house with a pet for at least five years.

Offenses include dogfighting, cockfighting, attacking an assistance animal, or cruelty to a non-livestock animal. Executive director of the non-profit animal shelter SPCA, Ron Hornsby, said this law will change how they screen adopters.

“We’ll be asking in our applications, have you ever been convicted of animal cruelty or an offense relating to it, and hopefully, we can reduce those individuals who may want to adopt through us.”

The first violation of this law will result in a class C misdemeanor punishable by a $500 fine. A repeated offense will be a class B misdemeanor, punishable by up to 180 days in jail and a maximum fine of $2,000.

Hornsby believes the law can keep animals out of the wrong hands.

“So you have a lot more work to do to try and weed out undesirables so we can ensure we still get the right homes for those animals.”

Until 2000, it was legal and common practice to euthanize military working dogs, known as MWDs, at the end of their useful service. Historically viewed as “surplus equipment,” they weren’t seen as having value beyond the military purpose for which they were trained. But in 2000, Congress enacted “Robby’s Law" which began an adoption program for military dogs at Lackland Air Force Base in San Antonio, where almost all military dogs are trained. But as late as 2019, Texas law enforcement dogs and horses were considered surplus property and a county could only “auction, donate or destroy” the property when it stopped being useful. Before the legislative session, the law made it difficult to retire a dog when their handler left or retired, and the animals were required to be sold to comply with state law. THLN supported legislation (unanimously approved by the House and Senate) creating the proposed amendment asking voters to authorize the adoption of retired law enforcement dogs and horses by their handler when they leave or retire.

In 2019, the voters overwhelmingly supported Proposition 10, a constitutional amendment, and now handlers can adopt retired law enforcement animals. Rep. Tony Tinderholt, R-Arlington carried SJR 32 in the House and Sen. Brian Birdwell, R-Granbury, carried SB 2100 in the Senate.

Originally Published in: Austin American-Statesman
Published on: July 26, 2023
Written By: Amethyst Martinez

Read the full article >