jurisdictions in North America have passed bans or strong restrictions on retail sales of puppies, kittens and sometimes rabbits, ferrets, pigs and other animals.

bans in 2016

bans since 10.26.2015
—  2+ bans every week! —
bans restrictions

Interactive Map of International Bans & Restrictions
Click icon to hide/show layers. See local areas with zoom . Click icons for data. Full page interactive map. →

Bans w/ Stores
Failed Lawsuits
Suits v. Stores
To see all layers on the map, open the side panel and select/deselect layers. Not all are visible. Full page interactive map. →



Throughout North America, jurisdictions [US: , Canada: ] have passed a ban on the sales of puppies, kittens and sometimes rabbits, ferrets, pigs and other animals in retail stores unless procured from accredited shelters or rescues, also known as "adopt-only" ordinances.

Strong Restrictions

Strong restrictions include ordinances that require pet stores to post breeder information on the cages of pets for sale and do not allow pets from mills that have had a USDA inspection violation in the past 2-5 years. These are nearly impossible to enforce, of course, and are dependent on comsumers and watch dog organizations to report violations. On the upside, if strong restrictions are proven to be repeatedly violated, it leaves a governing council or legislature no choice but to implement a total ban.

If the jurisdictions with strong restrictions [US: , Canada: ] that are causing puppy stores to close or change to humane are included, the number of international jurisdictions with pet sales bans or strong restrictions is .


Jurisdictions cite the reasons for the ordinance as humanitarian in nature since animals in puppy and kitten stores are virtually all sourced from large scale breeding operations, a.k.a. "puppy mills." Also frequently cited are issues of fraud as animals sold as pure-bred are sometimes not and animals born from sickly animals in pet mills can cost consumers in veterinarian and training bills. As costs rise, animals are sometimes turned over to local, tax payer-funded shelters or sold online.

By our count there have been at least bans passed in jursidictions that had at least one operating store in them, the majority of which are effective immediately. Some have very limited grandfathering, a few have limited grace periods, usually 6 months. Noted on our map with a red puppy head icon.

Resolutions of Support

cities, counties and state departments have issued statements and resolutions of support to encourage other jurisdictions to pass bans.


To date, 10:10 federal court lawsuits against jurisdictions have failed (including 2 appeals and a withdrawal) and all bans have been upheld. The lawsuits were brought by store owners and large-scale breeder support organizations.

known lawsuits are currently being brought against puppy stores and national chains selling puppies, kittens and other animals sourced from pet mills.


. In May 2016, Arizona enacted a law that prohibits local communities from ending animal suffering by passing retail store restriction and ban ordinances.

The law also created a statewide strong restriction on all stores.

We list bans that were passed, so we have not changed the number to remove the bans that were passed in Phoenix and Tempe, Arizona.

Email us with updates. →


jurisdictions have passed retail pet sale bans or strong restrictions

Breakdown by Country

states/provinces around the world passed local bansor local or statewide strong restrictions

Resolutions and Statements of Support

  1. New York State Attorney General
  2. Macomb County, Michigan
  3. Camden County, New Jersey: 15 incorporated jurisdictions have been encouraged
  4. Middlesex County, New Jersey: incorporated jurisdictions have been encouraged
  5. Ocean County, New Jersey: incorporated jurisdictions have been encouraged
  6. Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
  7. Monmouth County, New Jersey: incorporated jurisdictions have been encouraged
  8. Mercer County, New Jersey: 11 incorporated jurisdictions have been encouraged.
  9. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: ordinance resolution encourages other cities in PA to pass the same.
  10. Passaic County, New Jersey: incorporated jurisdictions have been encouraged.

10:10 Lawsuits Against Bans Have Failed.

Lawsuits Against Stores

  1. Class-Action v. Barkworks, Southern CA, 9/2014, expanded.
    Barkworks, a pet-store chain in four Southern California counties. In October, ALDF broadly expanded its lawsuit against Barkworks, initially filed in Orange County in September 2014 on behalf of a handful of individual plaintiffs, by adding class-action allegations, thus filing on behalf of a broad class of misled purchasers of the chain's puppies.
  2. Mount Clemens, Michigan, 8/2015
  3. Petland Pet Store National Chain, Atlanta, Georgia, 11/2015

Other Categories

Data Sources/Resources

Maps, Reporting, Additional Research: Puppy Mill Free US
another eYe
Send E-mail
Site design, graphics & programmning © eYe 2013 -
—All Rights Reserved—