Final signature count: 10,837

10,837 signatures toward our 30,000 goal

Dogs at federally licensed commercial breeding facilities are living in overcrowded kennels, going without veterinary care, and suffering conditions that federal inspectors have already flagged as unacceptable. The problem is not a lack of documentation. The problem is what happens — or doesn't — after the inspection report is filed.

The Animal Welfare Act gives the U.S. Department of Agriculture authority to fine commercial breeders, dealers, and exhibitors, and to revoke their licenses when they fail to meet basic standards of animal care. That authority is real. The enforcement record is not.⁴

Same Facilities. Same Violations. Same Licenses.

A January 2026 ASPCA analysis of federal inspection data found that facilities with long, documented histories of Animal Welfare Act violations — overcrowding, untreated injuries, inadequate shelter — kept their licenses and kept operating.² Inspectors returned. They cited the same problems. The animals remained in the same conditions.

This is not a series of isolated failures. It is a pattern built into the system. The Congressional Research Service has noted that USDA's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service relies on a tiered approach that leads with warning letters and modest fines before escalating to license suspension or revocation — and that the agency has faced persistent criticism for defaulting to informal resolution even when violation histories are extensive.⁴ Escalation to serious penalties rarely follows, even when corrections never materialize.

Fines That Don't Deter. Revocations That Don't Stick.

When financial penalties are issued, they frequently aren't large enough to change behavior. The ASPCA's review of 2025 enforcement data found that fines against problem facilities were often low enough to function as a routine operating cost rather than a genuine check on conduct.³ For a commercial breeder generating consistent revenue, a modest penalty every few years is easy to absorb.

License revocations are rarer still. Some of the most frequently cited breeders in the country have never lost their federal license.¹ In cases where revocation did occur, some operators later re-entered the industry — sometimes by registering under a family member's name.¹ The consequence meant to end chronic abuse became a temporary inconvenience.

The Floor Has to Mean Something

Federal licensing exists to set a minimum standard of care. When facilities breach that standard repeatedly without losing their license, the standard effectively disappears — and the animals it was designed to protect are left without recourse.

Puppies born into these conditions are often sold to consumers who have no way of knowing the inspection history behind the breeder's listing. The dogs themselves have no way to advocate for what the law already promises them.

USDA and Congress have the authority to fix this. What's needed is the will to use it — real license suspension and revocation for chronic violators, penalties large enough to create genuine deterrence, and loopholes closed so that revocation cannot be sidestepped through a name change.

Sign the petition now and call on the USDA and Congress to establish meaningful federal consequences for repeat Animal Welfare Act violators — and make federal licensing reflect real accountability for the animals in these facilities.