Missouri Tops List Of Humane Society's Annual "Horrible Hundred"

The Humane Society of the United States included 26 Missouri puppy mills on its annual list of “Horrible Hundred.”

Missouri topped the list for the ninth consecutive year.

Iowa was second with 17.

A Phelps County puppy mill was included in the report, which documents problematic dog breeders in the United States.

The Humane Society said puppy mills that were listed in the Horrible Hundred were cited by state and/or United States Department of Agriculture for issues related to kennel conditions and neglect.

HSUS also struck at USDA for not doing enough to ensure healthy conditions among breeders.

Missouri puppy mills that were listed on the report are:

Barnett’s Incredible Puppies, Rocky Comfort;

Beauchamp’s Puppy World, Lebanon;

John and Lizzie Bontrager, Clark;

Monroe County Puppies, Madison;

ATBAY Kennels, Chula;

PugPekinPoo-Tzu, West Plains;

Davis Kennel, Seymour;

Kandy’s Puppies, Milan;

Hargis’ Sunshine Kennel, Hallsville;

Kevin’s Hilltop Kennels, Marceline;

Sho Me Labradors, St. James; (fourth time in report)

Frenchie’s Puppies, Rogersville; (fifth time in report)

Arrowhead Springs Kennel, Ava;

Orchard Kennel, Cabool;

Country Lane Kennel, Clark;

Noah Miller, Keytesville;

Puppy Love Kennel, Elkland; (fourth time in report)

Carol’s Kennel, Urbana; (third time in report)

Rocky Top K9s, West Plains (seventh time in report)

Premier Puppies, West Plains; 

Smith’s Kennel, Salem; (third time in report)

Jet Kennels, Wasola;

Timber View Kennel, Clark;

Pleasant Hill Kennels, Jamesport; and,

Mervin and Lizzie Yoder, Clark.

The methodology to determine the Horrible Hundred relies on state kennel inspection reports showing violations, USDA inspection reports; federal, state or county official warnings or fines, if available; quantity of violations; whether a seller appears to be providing misleading or potentially fraudulent information to puppy buyers; whether a facility’s violations or other issues were newsworthy; whether the dealer was listed in a prior report and continued to rack up violations; availability of consumer complaints, investigations, photographs and indications that the facility was in business or possession of an active license.