BOSTON — The Senate on Thursday approved legislation to boost animal safety and equity for pet owners.
Senators voted 38-0 to pass the bill, which bans the retail sale of dogs, cats and rabbits in pet shops. Violators could face fines up to $5,000 that would go into a Homeless Animal Prevention and Care Fund.
It also expands the state’s anti-cruelty law to cover all household pets and violators could incur fines up to $500 for the third offense as well as potentially lose ownership of animals.
“This bill will make us a more compassionate state for animals and make pet ownership more accessible for residents here,” said Senate President Karen Spilka, who used to breed labs. “There is so much going on in the world today, as all of you know, some of it isn’t so great. Today, the Senate is taking action to do something that brings real happiness and joy to people’s lives every single day. And how can that be bad?”
If the bill becomes law, it would “end the inhumane puppy-mill-to-pet-shop pipeline,” Spilka’s office said. Signaling a crackdown for-profit pet sales tied to “large commercial breeders,” bill supporters said pet shops could instead display animals available from nonprofits for adoption.
The bill is a Ways and Means redraft of legislation the Committee on Environment and Natural Resources advanced in November, with new provisions aimed at protecting animals and providing more pathways for pet-ownership. The redraft bars manufacturers and contract testing facilities from using traditional animal testing methods for cosmetic or household products, product formulation, chemicals or ingredients.
The legislation also directs the Executive Office of Housing and Livable Communities to create a program allowing elderly residents and tenants in state public housing to keep pets in accordance with the facility’s requirements, so long as they are reasonable. The bill also calls on EOHLC to commission a report on how pet-related fees affect renters in private and public housing. It prohibits state public housing facilities from banning pets and discriminating based on breed, size, weight or appearance of a pet as well as requiring an animal to be declawed or evicting compliant tenants solely because they have a pet. Homeowner insurance companies may not factor a dog’s breed into underwriting, rating or renewal decisions.
Ally Blanck, director of advocacy with the Animal Rescue League of Boston, said housing-related issues are the most common reason why animals are brought to its shelter. The issue is particularly prevalent when someone moves and can’t take their pet with them. Usually that’s because the pet is too large or a certain breed that’s not allowed by the housing facility.
“It’s about helping people and pets stay together,” she said.
Lawmakers noted pets can help alleviate their owners’ stress as well as boost mental and physical health.
“It’s really important that people give dogs, all dogs, a chance, and get to know them and not prejudge them,” Spilka said.
Eight other states have passed similar legislation banning the sale of pets including Maine, Vermont, New York, Maryland, Illinois, California, Oregon and Washington.
The Retailers Association of Massachusetts, which has 4,000 members, has opposed the bill and sent a letter to senators Wednesday saying banning the sale of puppies, kittens and rabbits could place businesses at a disadvantage compared to out-of-state sellers and unregulated markets. It would also lead to a drop in sales, not only of pets, but pet supplies that could jeopardize businesses that employ local workers, RAM said.
“For many, such jobs provide a unique opportunity to build a career caring for animals, as is the case for many veterinarians and groomers, or in the retail industry as managers,” Ryan Kearney, general counsel for RAM, said in the letter. “These businesses are also an important part of our Main Streets and play an important part in our communities. Not only will a sales ban threaten the continued operation of these small businesses, but also the jobs, opportunities and communities they support.”
Sen. Patrick O’Connor estimated there are less than ten pet shops operating in the state. During the Senate session, he said the bill wouldn’t eliminate pet shops, but urge them to adapt, as has happened in California.
“This is not about shutting down small businesses. It’s about ensuring that businesses in Massachusetts are not reliant on a supply chain rooted in cruelty. It creates an opportunity for these businesses to evolve in a way that’s both ethical and economically sustainable,” said O’Connor.
Kearney advocated for Sen. Brendan Crighton amendment that would create an exception for pet shops operating in good standing for at least a year before the law goes into effect. The amendment was withdrawn.