TITLE
title
Discussion Regarding Potential Ordinance to Regulate Unlicensed Dog Breeders a/k/a Hobby Breeders
body
BRIEF OVERVIEW
On January 13, 2026, the Board, acting on Commissioner Steve Champion’s request for a consensus, directed the County Attorney’s Office to prepare a proposed ordinance by which the County would regulate “unlicensed dog breeders.” Subsequently, a bill was introduced in the Legislature, S.B. 1004, that if enacted, would have dog breeders regulated by the state and preempted local governments from so doing. Staff waited to work on preparing a proposed ordinance while the Legislature considered S.B. 1004.
The Legislature eventually enacted a substantially amended version of S.B. 1004, which (1) did not provide for the regulation of dog breeders and (2) explicitly provided that local governments will not be preempted from doing so. On May 12, 2026, the Governor signed the C.S. for S.B. 1004 into law as Chapter 2026-76.
This agenda item asks the Board to determine whether: (1) it still wants to regulate dog breeders; (2) if so, does it want to also regulate all pet animal breeders; and, (3) the manner(s) in which it wants to regulate breeding activities (e.g., permitting, bans on the retail sale of “puppy mill” dogs, etc.).
I. Legal and Regulatory Background
A. The Animal Welfare Act’s Regulation of Dog Breeders
Currently, the federal Animal Welfare Act (“AWA”), 7 U.S.C. §§ 2131-2158, and regulations promulgated thereunder, 9 CFR § 1.1, et seq., together constitute the only regulatory scheme for animal breeding that is in effect in Florida statewide. They establish federal standards for the humane care and treatment of certain animals sold wholesale or through a broker, publicly exhibited, used in biomedical research, or transported commercially. The AWA regulates the activities of dog breeders, requiring them to obtain licenses from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (“USDA”) and to comply with the standards of that the agency has adopted.
Within the USDA, the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (“APHIS”) enforces the AWA. The USDA’s adoption of regulations and APHIS’s enforcement thereof have been the subject of longstanding criticisms. For example, the USDA’s regulations exempt (1) breeders who sell directly to the public, (2) so-called hobby breeders (e.g., people who derive no more than $500 in gross income from the sale of animals), and (3) breeders that maintain fewer than four breeding females from having to comply with the AWA. See 9 CFR § 2.1(a)(3). Also, the USDA’s regulations are “puppy mill friendly,” and allow breeders to engage in practices that might be considered as cruelty to animals under Florida law. The USDA’s Inspector General (“IG”) issued audit reports on APHIS’ regulation of the dog breeding industry in 2010 and 2021, and each time the IG found that APHIS’ regulation of dog breeders was so lax as to practicably be nonexistent. See GIL HARDEN, U.S. DEPT. OF AGRIC. OFF. OF INSPECTOR GEN., AUDIT REPORT 33002-4-SF, APHIS ANIMAL CARE PROGRAM INSPECTIONS OF PROBLEMATIC DEALERS 1 (2010); GIL HARDEN, U.S. DEPT. OF AGRIC. OFF. OF INSPECTOR GEN., AUDIT REPORT 33601-0002- 31, ANIMAL CARE PROGRAM OVERSIGHT OF DOG BREEDERS 1, 2 (2021). Furthermore, the USDA regularly “rubber-stamps” facilities that possess AWA licenses by automatically renewing them for dog breeding operations without checking if the operations actually comply with the AWA’s standards. See, e.g., Kaitlyn Cameron, Striking A Balance: Why Federal and State Laws Should Be Revised to Effectively Deter Puppy Mills, 30 Animal L. 19, 33-34 (2024).
Importantly, the AWA expressly provides that it does not preempt a state, or a political subdivision of a state, from enacting animal care standards that are more restrictive than those promulgated by the USDA. See 7 U.S.C. § 2143(a)(8).
B. Governor DeSantis’ Request for Authority to Regulate Dog Breeders
On November 25, 2025, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis announced that to address the perceived deficiencies of APHIS’ enforcement of the AWA, he was requesting that the Legislature enact a dog breeding statute in its then-upcoming session. He requested that the new law require dog breeders to obtain a license from the Florida Department of Business and Professional Regulation (“DBPR”) and would have required DBPR to adopt mandatory standards of care which breeders would have had to comply. The Governor stated that the law that he was proposing would allow the state to “hold accountable puppy mills that abuse dogs, whether by overbreeding them, leaving them out in extreme weather, cramming them into small cages, or limiting their access to water.” See Press Release, Governor Ron DeSantis, Governor Ron DeSantis Announces Proposal to Protect Puppies in Florida (November 25, 2025).
C. Board Direction - Ordinance Regarding “Unlicensed Dog Breeders”
As noted above, the Board directed the County Attorney’s Office to draft an ordinance, that if enacted, would address the problems caused by “unlicensed dog breeders” on January 13, 2026. The Board, however, did not provide the County Attorney’s Office with any direction as to how the proposed ordinance should regulate dog breeding.
D. The Legislature Enacts Chapter 2026-76
Unbeknownst to the Board, a dog breeding regulatory bill, S.B. 1004, was also introduced in the Legislature on January 13, 2026. If S.B. 1004 had been enacted as it was originally introduced, the regulation of dog breeding would have been preempted by the state. Accordingly, County staff waited to draft a proposed ordinance until such time as the Legislature acted upon S.B. 1004.
The Legislature eventually passed a substantially amended version of S.B. 1004. Notwithstanding Governor DeSantis’ request, the bill it passed does not provide for state regulation of dog breeding operations, but instead, requires the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services to develop voluntary best management practices which dog breeders can choose to implement. See Chapter 2026-76, L.O.F. at § 3 (enacting Fla. Stat. § 828.291(1)). The Legislature left the task of filling the AWA’s regulatory gaps to local governments by authorizing them to “implement[ ] requirements for individuals or entities engaged in the breeding of dogs.” See id. (enacting Fla. Stat. § 828.291(2)).
II. The County’s Existing Regulations
While the Hernando County Code does provide for some regulation of dog breeding operations, most dog breeders are exempt from its scope.
Hernando County Code § 6-22(v) states that “[n]o person shall act as, perform duties of, or otherwise maintain a large kennel, business kennel, pet dealer, or breeder without first obtaining a ‘kennel license’ from county animal services.” (Emphasis Added) That provision imposes a one-sentence standard of care, “All animals kept or maintained in such a kennel shall be provided with a clean, fresh water supply, proper shelter from the elements and adequate food to maintain a normal condition of health.” Id. Kennel license holders permit animal services to inspect their facilities at least once every six months to ensure compliance with the standard of care. The provision’s sole guidance to animal services is to focus the inspections on “the cleanliness and comfort provided by the facilit[ies].” Id.
The Animal Services Ordinance’s definitions section, Hernando County Code § 6-2, limits Hernando County Code § 6-22(v)’s regulatory scope. For example, people fall under the definition of a “breeder” only if they maintain “dogs or cats that reproduce more than twenty (20) animals in any rolling (consecutive) 12-month period.” Id. Similarly, people only fall under the definition of “large kennel” if they maintain more than 15 dogs or cats. To constitute a “business kennel,” a facility must charge money for the services that it provides. Finally, a person constitutes a “pet dealer” if he or she “offers for sale, has sold, or intends to sell, either concurrently or in aggregate, more than twenty (20) dogs or cats in any rolling (consecutive) 12-month period.” Id.
Thus, almost all of the County’s “backyard” breeders are exempt from the County’s regulations, and for those facilities that are covered, the standards of care with which they must comply are extremely generic. A highlighted copy of the applicable ordinances is attached hereto.
III. The Board’s Regulatory Options
Florida counties typically regulate the breeding of dogs and sale of puppies by regulating dog breeding operations directly, banning or restricting the operations of “puppy mills,” or a combination of both.
By way of example and for purposes of discussion, the following ordinances are provided with this agenda item: (1) Clay County - requiring permits for hobby breeders, (2) City of Jacksonville - require permits for breeders of “pet” animals, (3) Miami-Dade County - requiring permits for breeders and regulating “puppy mills,” (4) Indian River County - prohibiting sales of dogs from puppy mills, and (5) Seminole County - prohibiting backyard breeders.
STRATEGIC PLAN INITIATIVES
Click or tap here to enter text.
FINANCIAL IMPACT
No Financial Impact
LEGAL NOTE
The Board has the authority to consider this agenda item pursuant to Fla. Stat. § 125.01.
recommendation
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommend that the Board discuss this matter then provide further directions, if any, to the County Attorney’s Office and Staff.