Indiana Governor's Controversial Move: New Law Invalidates Local Pet Sale Restrictions!
n a move stirring both applause and controversy, Governor Eric Holcomb of Indiana signed three bills into law on Monday, one of which nullifies 21 local ordinances aimed at restricting pet sales. Among these ordinances was House Enrolled Act 1412, a bill that has been in the making for several years and introduces care standards for dog breeders and pet stores.
The enactment of House Enrolled Act 1412 marks a significant shift in Indiana's approach to regulating the pet industry. Governor Holcomb, in a released statement, hailed the bill as a culmination of collective efforts addressing concerns raised since the previous session. He emphasized that the new law provides much-needed transparency and protections regarding the sale of dogs in Indiana. Notably, it mandates pet stores, breeding facilities, and animal rescue operations to register with the Indiana State Board of Animal Health. Additionally, pet stores are required to maintain records of each dog purchased, ensuring responsible breeding practices and enhancing animal care and safety across communities.
Senator Blake Doriot, R-Goshen, who sponsored the bill in the chamber, touted it as a proposal to establish some of the "strictest standards in the country" for retail stores and breeders. These establishments must now register with the State Board of Animal Health and adhere to Purdue University's Canine Care Certified Program.
However, critics argue that the measure, which failed to pass last year, undermines local control and favors so-called "puppy mills" over crowded animal shelters. Moreover, there is concern about the absence of state funding to support inspections.
Previously, local governments in various communities had implemented ordinances prohibiting pet stores from selling puppies sourced from breeding operations, aiming to combat puppy mills.
The final vote on House Enrolled Act 1412 in the House was contentious, with a narrow margin of 53-34.
This development signals a significant shift in Indiana's approach to regulating the pet industry, sparking debates over local control, animal welfare, and the balance between commercial interests and community well-being.
