Nevada debates AB 487 banning puppy mills and regulating pet stores

The Assembly Committee on Natural Resources convened on April 1, 2025, to discuss Assembly Bill 487, which aims to regulate pet sales in Nevada. The bill has sparked significant debate, particularly regarding its potential impact on pet stores and animal welfare.

Supporters of AB 487 argue that it is necessary to combat the issues associated with puppy mills and to protect animals from abuse. They emphasize that many pet stores are forced to close due to the high costs of caring for abused dogs, and they urge the committee to support the bill to prevent further suffering.

Opposition to the bill came from various stakeholders, including representatives from the Pet Advocacy Network and the American Kennel Club. They expressed concerns that the bill could inadvertently harm responsible breeders and pet stores, which are already heavily regulated. Alyssa Miller Hurley, speaking for the Pet Advocacy Network, highlighted that pet stores work exclusively with licensed breeders and that banning pet sales could lead to an increase in the black market for puppies, as seen in California after similar legislation was enacted.

Ken Kirkpatrick, a local pet store owner, echoed these sentiments, stating that the proposed ban could limit consumer choice and push families towards unregulated sources. He pointed out that pet stores provide essential services, including health warranties and insurance for pets, which help ensure the well-being of animals sold.

The committee also heard from Vanessa Green, a store manager at Petland Henderson, who noted that banning pet stores has not effectively increased adoption rates in California and has led to a rise in scams targeting consumers seeking pets online. She argued that pet stores play a vital role in matching pets with families and that eliminating this option could negatively impact those looking for specific breeds or types of dogs.

As the discussions unfolded, it became clear that while the intentions behind AB 487 are to protect animals, the implications of the bill could lead to unintended consequences that may not effectively address the root issues of animal welfare. The committee is expected to continue deliberating on the bill, weighing the concerns of both supporters and opponents as they consider the best path forward for pet regulation in Nevada.