overview
    mn legislature
    mn governor
    mn judicial

minnesota laws

If an individual county or city doesn’t believe federal and/or state laws are strong enough to deal with animal issues, local officials and citizens can choose to create and enact their own local ordinances.

Example: As dog and cat breeding is often viewed as a land use issue, some counties require breeders to apply for a Conditional Use Permit (CUP). An Environmental Impact Study may also be requested, among other reports. There are differences across the State as to what constitutes humane dog and cat breeding, as witnessed by some counties who have chosen to restrict large commercial breeding kennels within their area versus other counties who approve large commercial kennels with unlimited puppy production.

Conditional Use Permit

A Conditional Use Permit (CUP) is granted to businesses, within a particular zoning district, that want to use their property for certain activities. These activities sometimes conflict with adjacent properties (neighbors) or the community-at-large so some local governments require that a CUP application be submitted. The county would discuss the application and approve or deny it. The language and questions asked in each application vary by community.

As a citizen, you are allowed to attend hearings on the permit application or contact local officials with your opinion.

CUP decision criteria

The criteria for granting a conditional use permit also varies by community.

As an example, the following list of criteria was used by the Morrison County Commissioners when deciding whether or not to grant a CUP to a commercial dog breeding facility in Belle Prairie Township. To grant the permit, a majority of board members needed to vote “yes” on each criteria below. All board members voted yes to each; the permit was approved.

Note the language used in each criteria below. These type of decisions are typically evaluated based solely on commerce, planning and land use issues. Though the products are dogs or cats, the physical and psychological health of these “products” are not often considered, nor is the changing culture of Minnesota, where many households (both rural and urban) care for pets as family members and expect a higher level of protection for companion animals from the government.

• The use will not create an excessive burden on existing parks, schools, public roadways and other public facilities and utilities which serve or are proposed to serve the area.

• The use will be sufficiently compatible or separated by distance or screening from adjacent agricultural or residentially zoned land so that existing homes will not be depreciated in value and there will be no deterrence to development of vacant land.

• The structure and site shall have an appearance that will not have an adverse effect upon adjacent properties.

• The use in the opinion of the Planning Commission is reasonably related to the existing land use and the environment.

• The use is consistent with the purposes of the Zoning Ordinance and the purposes of the zoning district in which the applicant intends to locate the proposed use.

• The use is not in conflict with the Comprehensive Plan of the county.

• Existing occupants of nearby structures will not be adversely affected because of curtailment of customer trade brought about by the intrusion of noise, odor, glare, or general unsightliness.

NOTE: Restrictions can be placed on a permit. These restrictions can be used later in court, if the breeder violates conditions.

Examples:

• YODERS, dog breeders (Winona County)

The Winona County Board of Commissioners voted to approve applications from six commercial dog kennels to operate within their county; these breeders have already been operating without a permit. Animal Folks had submitted a complaint against one applicant in 2012 to the Sheriff office.

Below is the document submitted to the Board of Commissioners by Animal Folks. (Link does not include items in Appendix.)

- Submission to Winona County Board of Commissioners RE: Applications for permits by 6 breeding kennels to operate in Winona County

On January 20, 2016, the USDA inspected the kennel of David J. Yoder (Utica, MN) and cited him for violation of the Animal Welfare Act (lack of veterinary care). This violation was after this breeder had been granted a permit by the county. Links below.

- USDA inspection report

In April 2016, the USDA cited a different breeder (David A. Yoder in St. Charles, MN) with violating a requirement of the Animal Welfare Act: Lack of cleaning and sanitation. This Yoder had been granted a local conditional use permit in 2013. At that time, his animal count was 106 adult dogs and 69 puppies.

• LABEAU, dog breeder (Lynden Township, Stearns County)

On February 29, 2016, the Town Board for Lynden Township (in Stearns County) voted to revoke the Conditional Use Permit (CUP) of Valorie Muggli (now LaBeau), a dog breeder operating since 2007 in that township. Animal Folks was present for the meeting. For details and copies of the resolution and the original CUP, click on:

• Town Board Resolution - Revocation

• Muggli (LaBeau) - Conditional Use Permit

LaBeau appealed the Township's revocation of her license. (Case no. 73-CV-16-4088). Case was dismissed in May 2017. LaBeau was charged with 3 criminal counts: 1) public nuisance (609.74(1)); 2) acting as an unlicensed commercial breeders advertising animals for sale (347.62(c)); and 3) operating as a commercial breeder without a license (347.629(d)). She was convicted of 2 of the three counts, both of which were petty misdemeanors. Case no.: 73-CR-16-3873