California has stopped destroying records containing vital information about the underground puppy market after a Times investigation found that some unscrupulous sellers were importing hundreds of dogs into the Midwest with little oversight.
Karen Ross, secretary of the California Department of Food and Agriculture, confirmed that the agency's records are now being kept, but gave few details on how the state will use them.
“We don't have a staff dedicated to this, so we're still a little tight-lipped right now, but it's not because we don't want to be part of the solution,” he said in a brief interview this week.
In California, all dogs brought into the state for resale require a certificate issued by a state-licensed veterinarian showing the animal's origin, destination and certification of health for travel. The agriculture agency long ago received those health certificates from other states by mistake — the records are supposed to go to public health departments — and, in recent years, has made a habit of quickly discarding them.
By obtaining health certificates in other states, the Times found buyers unknowingly buying expensive dogs from sellers posing as local breeders. Many dogs were taken from out-of-state kennels, leaving new owners with sick pets and expensive vet bills.
After the investigation, lawyers and animal advocates asked the provincial department of agriculture to stop “destroying evidence” that dogs are being imported into the state illegally, prompting the agency to withdraw its approach.
“There's a lot of interest in finding solutions, and we're very interested in that ourselves,” Ross said.
A spokesman for the agricultural association previously admitted that the current system is “confusing” as the state is responsible for health certificates for the importation of livestock and poultry but the regions must obtain the same documents for dogs.
The Ministry of Agriculture said that it receives up to 50 dogs with health certificates per day and since they were sent by mistake, no staff is willing to handle them. Ross said the previous decision to delete the records should not be confused with an agency that doesn't care — “we do care.”
The agency said it has informed other states that the records should go to the states, not them. In response, some states simply stopped sending records to California altogether, The Times found.
California began requiring records in 2014 to protect consumers from buying sick puppies and reduce the chances of dogs brought into the state contracting infectious diseases. Lawmakers said at the time that the law would also give states a more complete picture of the number of dogs entering their territory from outside California — a point of contention for local animal control officers as pet sales proliferate online, according to files in the State Archives. .
After the Times report, the Chairman of the Senate Senate Seni. Tom Umberg (D-Orange) had asked the Department of Agriculture to immediately stop destroying health certificates so that legislators and animal welfare officials “can accept the information that has come out.”
“I have since received assurances from Secretary Ross that these documents will not be deleted, which relieves me,” said Umberg's statement.
Ross said the department has tried to find other records that were destroyed. After a public records request, the agency last week provided 57 records of dogs imported into California, but the names and addresses of those who ordered the animals were redacted. In one record, six cavapoos, all 8 weeks old, were approved by an Ohio veterinarian for shipment to California. The name and address, including the city, of the buyer have been blacked out by California officials.
In many cases, California agriculture officials have also renamed the breeder.
Deborah Howard, founder of the Companion Animal Protection Society, called for health certificates from different states to track how dogs go from puppy mills to pet stores and other retailers. In the past, he said, California has provided unaltered copies of health certificates to his organization and should continue to do so.
“There are too many dogs suffering right now in the state of California, and we have a responsibility to track every dog that comes in,” Howard said, referring to the overcrowding problem at shelters across the state. “It should be a public record so anyone can request that information.”
Under state law, dog importers are required to provide records to public health departments, but few actually do. Without those records, dogs are being imported illegally. Many county officials, on the other hand, didn't know they had to download the documents, and, for the most part, didn't.
Randy Friedman, spokesman for Ventura County Animal Services, said the county had not received health certificates for dogs this year. By requesting documents from other states, the Times found large records of dogs in recent years that must have been sent by California dog importers to Ventura County.
“Bad actors who buy dogs from out-of-state puppy mills to sell to unsuspecting California buyers are less likely to submit health certificates to import dogs in accordance with regulations. [the law] because they want to escape surveillance,” said Friedman.
Lisa Eldridge, public safety division manager for the LA County Department of Animal Care and Control, said the agency does not track puppies trucked in from the Midwest, but said import records would be helpful.
“Will it be useful from an enforcement point of view? Of course,” he said. “I think we need to find out who the big players are. Who are the people who import litters and litters and puppies.”
At the same time, he said that the volume of import records that must be followed may frustrate the department as it lacks staff.
He agreed that the system as it is now established is easy for importers to use and the penalties for not submitting health certificates to public health departments are light and not enforced.
“How should they be caught? That is the question,” he said. “Why do you follow the rules?”
Source link
