Written by Mindi Callison
with input from our staff and volunteers
Rethinking Puppy Mill Messaging: Why Puppy Mill Advocacy Should Evolve With An Evolving Industry
For decades, advocates have worked tirelessly to expose the cruelty of puppy mills and their connection to pet stores (almost exclusively) in order to reduce the suffering of dogs bred for profit. We keep seeing the same horrific photos, videos, and PSAs and it makes it all feel so urgent, so critical. Until lately, our messaging in this space always relied on simple, blunt language to break through public noise and shed a light on the industry’s secrecy in order to make change happen as fast as possible. That simplistic approach mattered. It woke a lot of people up, but it also left a lot of advocates in the dark about what is actually happening when it comes to breeders, puppy mills, and how consumers are buying.
Now we understand how critical it is to make sure that advocates continue understanding the evolving landscape of this breeding industry, in order to understand why strategies need to also evolve so we can be the most effective speakers on the issue. When we are able to see and understand the industry on a deeper level, we can better educate consumers about safe ways to acquire new pets in an ever-evolving landscape.
It has been 20 years since the first retail sales ban was passed, and since then more than 500 localities and states have passed pet store ordinances that ban the sale of puppies and kittens in retail establishments. Over that time we have seen some breeding facilities retire and close, while we have seen others transition to operating without a license and selling online. We have also seen some commercial breeders step up to the plate and show us that it is possible to breed in a humane way, meanwhile we have seen an enormous uptick of breeders that are operating without any oversight (more than 60,000 breeders are selling through one website).
So much has changed since we started learning about the issue, but the way we talk about it has remained the same. That is a big problem.
Puppy Mills, Breeders, and Sellers have evolved in so many ways and so has the landscape, which means that we are working with outdated advice for the public. Bad actors have learned how to exploit loopholes, co-opt all of the humane-sounding language we use, and hide behind licensing, labels, and marketing. In this environment, oversimplified messaging no longer just falls short, in many ways it is actively undermining our work.
The mission to end puppy mills and puppy mill cruelty has not changed. What may feel different is our commitment to being honest and authentic with the words we say. In this space, that can feel jarring because we have heard and said the same things for so long. In order to be effective, it is imperative that we use clear and accurate language in order to build trust with lawmakers, journalists, and the public. Being more direct also strengthens our advocacy efforts because when we speak, the truth holds up under pressure.
Changing our language and messaging can be really tough. We recommend tuning in to Episode 38 of our podcast in order to first understand how the rest of the sheltering world is evolving the way they communicate.
So Where Should We Begin?
It is really, really hard to change how you speak. It requires slowing down and being more intentional about the words we choose. It also means we have to have a better understanding of the issues that we are speaking about. Please know, this isn’t just a ‘puppy mill advocacy issue’, this is something that plagues a lot of causes and initiatives. Sometimes we oversimplify to make sure the masses can understand it and repeat it, but in doing so we leave so much out of the conversation. When we don’t acknowledge the complex nature of the work we are doing, it can also make our work look ineffective.
Here are a few phrases that we suggest rethinking. We also have a longer document here that you can read through for further explanation.
_________
“Adopt Don’t Shop”
Why it’s complicated: While well-intentioned, this slogan can shut down dialogue and ignores the reality that many people will purchase dogs even when we suggest pet adoption. Beyond that, it doesn’t leave space for education on problematic rescue sourcing.
What the research shows: The term ‘adoption’ has been co-opted by pet stores and breeders, which adds even more confusion to the public when we use the phrase. If everyone is using the word ‘adopt’ then it loses its meaning.
What we say now: “Choose adoption as your first option” or “Adopt or Shop, Responsibly.”
_________
“Amish Puppy Mill” or “Amish Breeder”
Why this needed to change: Harmful breeding practices are not tied to any single religion or culture. Singling out one community allows the industry to deflect responsibility and oversimplifies a systemic problem.
What our experience shows: We have visited many dog breeding operations that were operated by members of Amish and Mennonite communities and nothing we saw would suggest they would allow or approve of cruelty. We can’t put one label on an entire community in a fair or ethical way.
What we suggest: We suggest leaving the word ‘Amish’ out of it altogether. By using the word as an adjective, you are hoping to draw a picture in someone’s head. Use clearer descriptive words to get your point across without accusing an entire religious community of cruelty.
_________
“All Commercial Breeders Are Puppy Mills” or “USDA Licensed Means Puppy Mill”
Why it breaks down under pressure: Blanket statements like this aren’t truthful because they replace accuracy with assumption. These terms describe regulatory and licensing categories instead of animal welfare outcomes, which can be confusing to the public and lawmakers. There are many licensed breeders that don’t operate puppy mills and when they prove that, our argument crumbles in every setting.
What our experience and data shows: The term ‘puppy mill’ draws different images, based on the person hearing it. The word has been used for so many different scenarios, that it has caused confusion when the public encounters a subpar breeding operation that doesn’t fit their picture of a puppy mill. Beyond that, there are licensed breeders on the state and federal with minimal numbers of dogs and rescues that have obtained a USDA license. Treating all licensees as abusive simply due to being regulated erases critical nuance, misdirects public outrage, and gives bad actors cover. We also will reference our visits to kennels as evidence that not all licensed breeders run inhumane operations.
To take it a step further, no breeder will ever admit to being a puppy mill. So if we give advice that is only surface level, customers will easily fall for sales tactics from subpar operations.
What we suggest: “Some USDA-licensed breeders repeatedly fail to meet even minimum standards.” or “Licensing without meaningful enforcement enables puppy mills to operate legally.” or even “67% of licensed breeders have had some kind of violation in the last 5 years, including both minor violations and severe issues that pertain to animal welfare.”
_________
“All Pet Store Puppies Come From Puppy Mills”
Why it doesn’t hold up under pressure: While there is overwhelming evidence showing that some pet stores are not selective when choosing which type of breeder to buy from, ‘absolute’ language invites easy rebuttals as some stores rebrand themselves as ethical or as buying from humane places. When we talk only in absolutes, that means the store has to only provide one example of a facility they source from that the public would be okay with and our entire argument derails. Absolutes are easy to refute.
What the data shows: 36% of USDA licensed breeders that sell to pet stores have had violations in the last 5 years. Looking at that data with the knowledge that some kennels have worked to improve their operations, it isn’t accurate to allege that “all” puppies are coming from inhumane puppy mills. Through our research we are able to pinpoint exactly who is selling to stores, exactly how many times, and our talking points are stronger because of that.
And also, sourcing is only one part of the issue with puppy stores. Puppy enrichment, puppy health, and predatory financing practices are also red flags that can and should be discussed, especially in instances where inhumane sourcing allegations can’t be proven.
What we say now: “36% of the breeders who sell to stores have had state or federal violations in the last 5 years.” or “When you buy a puppy without meeting the parents, you are at risk for supporting an inhumane breeder.” or even “Puppy mills continue to exist because in-person and online sellers provide a consistent retail pipeline without any regulation surrounding sourcing.”
_________
“Dogs Sold Online Come From Puppy Mills”
Why this argument doesn’t hold up: “Selling online” can refer to a wide variety of platforms and methods. Online sales can happen on social media platforms, personal breeder websites, online marketplaces, or through third-party brokering sites, all of which operate differently. The real issue isn’t the “online” aspect but the lack of regulation and oversight in certain online spaces that make it harder for consumers to know where their pets are truly coming from.
What the data shows: Puppy mills are selling anywhere that regular breeders are selling. The outlet shouldn’t be the center of the conversation, we should instead focus on how to educate consumers on responsible buying habits. They should know what to look for and what to avoid, beyond labels.
What we say now: “Puppy mills can sell through all of the same outlets that regular breeders do, which is why the customer should research the breeder outside of the sales method in order to ensure they are supporting a humane facility.”
_________
“Ending the Puppy Mill Pipeline”
Why this statement doesn’t hold under pressure: This phrase is often used for policy surrounding pet store bans and makes a definitive statement. “If you pass this, then it will end the puppy mill pipeline into our state.” The statement ignores the many different ways that puppy mills can and do sell to the public, and puts all of the responsibility on one sales method.
What the data shows: Pet store bans have played a role in causing some USDA facilities to cancel their license, however, our research is showing that many of those operators are not closing. Instead, many have pivoted to selling online without any regulation or inspections due to loopholes in regulation. When we use flat slogans to push for policy, it doesn’t leave space for advocates to have to come back to that state or community to work on future legislation that would continue having an impact on this industry.
What do we suggest: We suggest speaking honestly about the bill or ordinance and what impact it will have. If it won’t truly end puppy mill sales in your state, don’t say that it will. Use other language to communicate your goal.
_________
What Precision Makes Possible When Speaking
By choosing accurate language over absolutes, we are creating space for stronger laws, broader partnerships, and more effective consumer education. We spend less time defending exaggerated claims and fighting in policy rooms, so we can have more time to dismantle systems that harm dogs.
The truth about puppy mills is devastating on its own, it doesn’t need exaggeration. It needs clarity, transparency, and honesty.
You can watch us chat through some of these messaging changes here or listen to episode 40 of our podcast.
