Republican and Democratic lawmakers are working to push a bill that would change the Animal Welfare Act (AWA) and strengthen its enforcement mechanism.
HR 349, also known as “Goldie’s Act,” has garnered support from animal rights activists and others who argue that it will help to protect animal welfare in commercial facilities.
The bill is named after a Golden Retriever who was kept in a USDA-licensed puppy mill in 2021 where she was receiving veterinary care. She later died. The federal government filed a lawsuit against the organization, alleging that it was mistreating the animals under its care.
The proposed legislation mandates increased inspections of facilities that house animals, imposes more severe punishments for violations, fosters collaboration with local law enforcement, and gives the USDA more power to seize people’s animals if it decides they are being mistreated.
If passed, the bill would significantly expand the definition of a violation of the AWA to include any “deficiency, deviation, or other failure to comply” with the law’s provisions. The text of the bill indicates that “Each violation and each day during which a violation continues shall be a separate offense.”
Those who violate any provisions of the AWA “shall be subject to a civil penalty by the Secretary of not more than $10,000 for each such violation.”
The USDA would “have access to the places of business and the facilities, animals, and those records required to be kept pursuant to section 10 of any such dealer, exhibitor, intermediate handler, carrier, research facility, or operator of an auction sale.”
The Secretary shall inspect each research facility and the premises of each dealer, and each exhibitor, including any properties, animals, facilities, vehicles, equipment or other premises used or intended for use in an activity subject to regulation under this Act, at least once each year and, in the case of any violation of this Act, shall conduct such follow-up inspections as may be necessary until all such violations are corrected.
The USDA would be required to carry out annual inspections of all animal facilities and seize any animal that they deem to be experiencing physical or psychological harm.
Goldie’s Act would mete out harsher penalties on those who violate the AWA. In addition to the $10,000 fines, violators of the legislation could also face prison time.
Goldie’s Act is one of those laws that sounds great at first glance. After all, nobody wants to see dogs, cats, or other pets abused, right?
However, this legislation will likely cause more harm than good – especially to small-scale and hobby breeders who could be disproportionately affected by the law. The provisions of the law would impose onerous compliance costs and administrative burdens that these smaller operations would struggle to adhere to.
This could not only drive many of these organizations out of business, it could also needlessly criminalize those who run afoul of the legislation. The broad language included in the measure will certainly result in the imposition of harsh penalties for those who commit minor or unintentional violations – even in cases where there is no direct harm to animals.
Indeed, I have seen this happen numerous times at the local and state levels of government. I wrote a report about a man in Arkansas who was unjustly accused of mistreating his dogs and chickens and found himself in legal trouble. The case involves several corrupt officials who collaborated to target him.
If the federal government is granted even more power to enforce the provisions in the AWA, it could intensify the problem. Yes, nobody wants to see animals being abused. But when the government gets involved – especially to this extent, we have to take into account the impact on humans.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member