Steve Kruse, an operator of a dog-breeding facility in West Point, Iowa, continues to sell dogs and funnel puppies through intermediaries despite losing his federal license, the ASPCA alleges.

The charge sits at the center of a civil complaint the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals filed against the U.S. Department of Agriculture in September 2024, arguing the agency failed to enforce animal welfare rules and allowed a pattern of “puppy laundering” to continue. In Iowa, commercial dog breeders, defined as those keeping four or more sexually intact dogs over 12 months, are required to obtain a state license or permit from the Iowa Department of Agriculture and Land Stewardship.

The ASPCA’s complaint accuses Kruse of using associates to route dogs to retailers through intermediary breeders, a practice described in the filing as puppy laundering. The suit names two associates, Brian Lichirie and Wuanita Swedlund, as participants in that alleged scheme. Unfortunately, unlicensed puppy mills are a prevalent issue in the United States, with the Humane Society estimating that approximately 10,000 operate nationwide, and notably, for every one USDA-licensed facility, there are about two unlicensed ones.

In its filing, the ASPCA said bluntly: “It appears that Mr. Kruse continues to engage in regulated activities, despite the cancellation of his license, and continues his scheme to launder puppies,” attributing the quote to the organization.

That allegation underpins seven counts brought against the USDA, which the ASPCA contends knowingly licensed Kruse and his agents despite evidence of illegal activity. The complaint asks the court to require the agency to enforce the Animal Welfare Act and related regulations. Consumers looking for reputable breeders can help by visiting facilities in person to inspect living conditions, including signs of regular veterinary care and adequate space.

Court records show activity on or around Oct. 8, 2024, when a judge noted developments related to Kruse’s USDA license status. The ASPCA has argued the expiration does not erase the agency’s responsibility to investigate ongoing regulated activity.

In a further statement included in the filing, the ASPCA said, “The USDA did not offer any indication that they had conducted an inquiry or investigation as to whether Mr. Kruse continues to participate in the venture even without his license, still owns the land on which the kennels operate, or otherwise maintains involvement in the ongoing enterprise.” This lack of oversight is concerning, especially in light of the ongoing issues with puppy mills across the country, which continue to thrive in some areas.

The complaint frames the issue as more than a licensing technicality. The ASPCA alleges the continued use of intermediaries allows sales to go forward despite prior findings and that the USDA’s licensing choices have enabled the operation to persist.

The organization has laid out its legal challenge in a public statement and accompanying court filings available through the ASPCA. The lawsuit seeks court orders forcing the USDA to answer for its enforcement decisions and to block any practices that enable regulated activities by unlicensed parties.

The dispute centers on the regulatory relationship between a federal agency and a private operator in West Point, Iowa, and on whether agency oversight has kept pace with alleged continuing violations. The ASPCA’s filing places particular emphasis on the role of the named associates in moving animals through the marketplace, which is critical in understanding how these unlicensed activities persist.

Legal papers and filings referenced by the ASPCA argue the agency’s actions — or inaction — warrant judicial review. The litigation is ongoing, and the court’s requests for additional briefing indicate judges are weighing procedural questions tied to license status alongside the merits of the allegations.

Source

Source

Original reporting: view the original article.