Dog Owners of the Granite State

During the 2010 NH Legislative Session, DOGS earmarked some 20 bills that would impact ownership, breeding, training and working with dogs and other companion animals. The numerous members of DOGS that testified at public hearings and contacted legislators certainly had an impact in legislators making informed voting decisions.  Due to the tireless involvement of our members, all of the bills had favorable outcomes. The final dispositions of the major bills that we were involved in are summarized below.

In August, the House Environment & Agriculture Committee will hold meeting to discuss  the “puppy mill” issues that were raised by HB 1624. The supporters of placing restrictions on dog breeding are expected to present information to encourage 2011 legislation.

2010 is an election year for all NH state house members and senators, and the governor (2 year terms). DOGS encourages you to get to know who is running for the House and Senate seats, ask them about their positions on companion animal issues, and knowledgeably exercise your right to vote in the September Primary and the November General Election.

DOGS is An American Kennel Club affiliated federation that represents NH dog and other companion animal owners. Our members are involved in all aspects of pet ownership. To become a supporting member of DOGS’ programs and our legislative advocacy efforts contact Joyce Arivella, DOGS President, at  DOGS@NHdogs.org .  Contact Joyce if your organization is interested in a legislative presentation that will include a review of which legislators supported our positions and a preview of the 2011 DOGS’ legislative initiatives at your next meeting. Read more…

On July 10th, in response to an editorial on hoarding, the Keene Sentinel published a letter to the editor from a supporter of HB 1624 and HB 1639. Her argument was that, rather than put limits on the number of animals a person could own, the legislature needs to enact laws similar to HB 1624 and HB 1639 – setting specific standards of care.  At the conclusion of her letter, she described the opponents of these bills in the following manner:

“….our representatives in Concord will continue to bend to the will of a small but extremely vocal group of citizens who would prefer to keep animal protection measures in the 17th century.”

Here is the response from our President which was published on July 17th.

READER OPINION: New animal-protection laws are not needed, by Joyce Arivella of the Dog Owners of the Granite State

In response to Jean Slepian’s letter published July 10: The solution to animal hoarding does not lie with more animal protection legislation. New Hampshire already has excellent cruelty laws. The solution lies with the public.

The bills Ms. Slepian refers to, HB1624 and HB1639, were poorly written bills that were rightly rejected by the Legislature.

HB1624 would have required all dogs to be exercised for an hour a day no matter what the weather or even the dog’s health. New Hampshire just went through a heat wave of temperatures close to 100 degrees. A dog that was forced to exercise in that weather could easily have died of heatstroke.

By making owners of unaltered dogs subject to the same rules as pet shops, the owners who kept their dogs in the house would have to get rid of any cats they had as the rules prohibit dogs and cats being kept in the same “primary enclosure.” Finally, the standards only applied to those who owned unaltered dogs. True animal protection applies to all dogs.

HB 1639, the tethering bill, would have pitted neighbor against neighbor if there was any suspicion of a dog being tied out for more hours than stated in the bill. A neighbor who simply didn’t like dogs could call the police to complain about the length of time it was tethered.

There were other problems with the bill, the length of the tether specified could have been dangerous for large breed dogs. Many housing complexes prohibit fencing, and for dog owners in these situations, tethering may be their only option.

As president of Dog Owners of the Granite State, I suggest that neighbors watch out for each other. Neighbors and friends of collectors have the best knowledge of what is happening in their home and the best access to the person with this type of psychological problem. They can gently speak to the person collecting animals and if reason doesn’t work, possibly they can bring in a family member to help. Perhaps they can help the person find good loving homes for some of the animals.

This is how things were handled in the past. Pet owners looked out for and helped each other through tough times, for the good of both the person and the animals. If the population is getting out of control and the person is unable to stop taking in more animals and unable to care for them then it is time to bring in authorities. This should be a LAST resort, not a first step.

The small and vocal group that Ms. Slepian refers to in her letter is Dog Owners of the Granite State. We are an American Kennel Club-affiliated federation. Our members are involved in all aspects of pet ownership including trainers, mushers, breeders, members of kennel clubs and cat clubs, pet owners and veterinarians.

Our members have served on state commissions and helped write some of New Hampshire’s very good animal laws. We operate two websites — www.nhdogs.org for legislation and nhpetsonline.com for general pet owners.

Rather than trying to keep “nh animal protection measures in the 17th century,” DOGS has been one of the leaders in animal protection in New Hampshire while protecting animal owners from unwarranted intrusion in their lives.

DOGS is against animal cruelty. I do not know anyone who neglects or hoards animals. If I did, I would do my very best to educate them, and only if that failed, would I report them.

The DOGS Legislative Briefing Newsletter was suspended for few weeks while the legislature took a vacation break and the House cleared up a backlog of action on other bills. The diligent advocacy activities of DOGS members made a significant difference in the outcome of several bills. Every bill that DOGS opposed has been killed. The bills that remain for the last half of the NH legislative session require our support – a way to help those that have helped us and show that DOGS is pro-active.

NH LEGISLATIVE ACTION UPDATE

HB 1639 : Dog Tethering Requirements & Unlawful Taking

The House Criminal Justice Committee voted 13-2 to kill the bill (Inexpediant to Legislate). Representative Gagne in the committee report stated that the bill contained “requirements for a proper tether which the majority felt was unduly intrusive. We also felt that the current statutes are adequate at this time because this bill, if enacted, would punish all animal owners, including mushers, rather than the occasional animal abuser.” On March 11th, the House voted to accept the committee recommendation and the bill is killed for this year.

Many thanks to all who made the extra effort to testify in opposition and send numerous messages to the committee and your local representatives.

HB 1624: placing undue restrictions on dog breeders and owners under the guise of eliminating “puppy mills”.

STATUS: Killed in the House on February 10th.

SB 365: requires that animal shelters (including dog rescue shelters) cannot sell, give away, adopt, or otherwise transfer ownership of any dog or cat unless it has been sexually sterilized. DOGS supported the bill which was requested by animal shelter advocates. DOGS requested an amendment that added essential protections for animals and animal owners such as; an exemption for health reasons and an animal reclaimed by its owner. The amendment was incorporated into the bill. Further amendments are being prepared for the House Committee public hearing by DOGS in coordination with the State Veterinarian.

STATUS: Passed the Senate with Amendment. DOGS’ requested amendments were incorporated into the bill. A Senate floor amendment was accepted that requested by Sen. Roberge, bill’s sponsor, that provided for an exemption for shelters that can demonstrate that at least 85% of the dogs transferred had been sterilized in the previous year through the voucher system or private means. Next step: public hearing before the House Environment & Agriculture Committee to be announced.

HB 1417: allowing companion dogs in certain areas of restaurants at the owners’ discretion. The bill’s sponsor, Rep. Butler, owns an Inn and the new health inspector maintains that the owner’s dogs having access to the dining room is a violation of the state regulations. DOGS is supporting the bill.

STATUS: The House Commerce Committee is recommended the bill for passage and it passed the House. Next step – Senate Commerce Committee public hearing to be announced.

HB 1525: allowing appropriately trained physical therapists to practice on animals. The bill adds language to the statute passed last year that is agreeable to the therapists and the NH veterinarian’s association. DOGS supports the bill.

STATUS: Passed the House. Next step: Senate public hearing to be scheduled.

HB 1596: changes the time period by 15 days during which dog owners who have failed to license their dogs shall be notified of the civil forfeiture of each unlicensed dog and increases the warrant fee from $5 to $10. The bill was requested by the municipal clerks’ organization. After attending the public hearing, DOGS still didn’t understand why the bill was needed.

STATUS:  House voted to kill the bill.

HB 431: requiring certain engine coolants and antifreeze to include an aversive agent so that they are rendered unpalatable. DOGS supports this bill.

STATUS: Awaiting a recommendation from the House Criminal Justice Committee on the penalty provisions in the bill. Previously, it was approved for passage by the House Commerce Committee for the commerce provisions.

HB 1639 (Dog Tethering Requirements & Unlawful Taking) will be voted on by the full House on March 10th.

From the N.H. House Calendar –

HB 1639-FN-L, relative to the tethering of dogs. INEXPEDIENT TO LEGISLATE. Rep. Larry G Gagne for Criminal Justice and Public Safety:  This bill would amend RSA 644:8, III to add, as a separate category of cruelty to animals, the tethering of a dog for more than fourteen cumulative hours in a twenty-four hour period.  It also would contain requirements for a proper tether which the majority felt was unduly intrusive.  We also felt that the current statutes are adequate at this time because this bill, if enacted, would punish all animal owners, including mushers, rather than the occasional animal abuser. Vote 13-2.

Thanks to everyone who wrote letters and emails and to those who came to Concord to testify – you did a good job.

NH LEGISLATIVE ACTION

HB 1639 (Dog Tethering Requirements & Unlawful Taking) – House Criminal Justice Committee Votes.

On February 11th, the House Criminal Justice Committee voted to recommend the bill Inexpedient to Legislative in a 13-2 vote. Rep. Larry Gagne from Manchester made the motion. Representatives McCarthy and Chandley voted against the motion to recommend killing the bill. The bill will likely be voted on by the full House on February 24th.

Many thanks to all who prepared and presented testimony and signed in opposed as well as those who sent letters. The members of this committee are becoming more knowledgeable about animal issues because of your involvement.

HB 1624: placing undue restrictions on dog breeders and owners under the guise of eliminating “puppy mills”. Killed in the House on February 10th.

DOGS is grateful for all the time and thought that members put into making contacts with legislators on this bill. Not only did our position on the bill prevail but the messages helped create a better understanding among legislators about our issues. Read more…

HB 1639 (Dog Tethering Requirements & Unlawful Taking)

House Criminal Justice Committee Schedules Vote.

The House Criminal Justice Committee has scheduled HB 1639 for a committee vote on February 9th or 11th.  This clearly indicates that there will not be a subcommittee convened to discuss the bill further.  HB1639 adds a new section to the animal cruelty laws that sets specific requirements for dog tethering. It also amends RSA 644:8, IV-a(a), the animal cruelty statute, to allow an animal, suspected of being abused or neglected, to be taken into custody without a warrant.

NEXT ACTION STEPS

If you have not already sent a note to the members of the House Criminal Justice Committee, there are still a few days to remind them of the problems inherent in the bill and why it should be recommended “Inexpedient to Legislate” (Killed).  It is also a good time to start contacting your local representative to inform them about the bill and the need to for it to be voted “Inexpedient to Legislate”. Your local legislator and their contact information can be found here.

STATUS UPDATE ON OTHER BILLS

HB 1624: Breeder restrictions.  On February 10th, the House will vote on the committee recommendation of “Inexpedient to Legislate”.  Representative Groen stated in his report in the House Record describing why the committee voted 12-1 for this recommendation, “This bill will place undue restrictions on breeders and dog owners alike.  The rules that would be applied are very generic and not breed specific, thus, dog owners could be charged with cruelty to their pets.  Cruelty laws are already in existence in RSA 644:8, making this legislation unnecessary.  Local animal control and law enforcement have the authority to remedy any abuses that may arise.”  It is unlikely that the committee recommendation will be overturned during the House floor vote and DOGS appreciates those who contacted their local representatives to help insure that the bill will be killed.

Read more…

Update on HB 1624 (Dog Breeder Requirements) & HB 1639 (Tethering and Animal Confiscation Criteria)

This past week, two bills that would restrict the rights of dog breeders and animal owners had legislative public hearings. Many thanks to all who prepared and presented testimony and signed in opposed as well as those who sent letters.  No matter what the outcome of the bill, we can be very proud of our articulate messages, engaging presentations and knowledgeable demeanor.  Feedback indicates that the legislators were impressed and became more informed.

NEXT STEPS

Those who testified are encouraged to send a note to the committee members thanking them for listening to your concerns and offering to provide any further information to address any concerns or questions.
Supporters of the bills are reaching out work on amendments. HB 1639 and HB 1624 NEED TO BE KILLED – amendments to make the bills “better” are not an option as the bills are totally flawed, unjustified and lack funding for enforcement. If the bills were to be passed with exceptions for certain breeds or activities, the supporters would only return to the legislature in the future to remove the exceptions.
At this time neither bill has been scheduled for a subcommittee meeting by the respective committees.  The House Environment & Agriculture Committee may vote on the bill during their executive session on January 28th.  Stay tuned for more updates.

If you have not yet send a letter to the committee members and your local state representative, please do so now!  Remember to individualize your letters.

Your local legislator and their contact information can be found at here.

HB 1639 adds a new section to the animal cruelty laws that sets specific requirements for dog tethering. It also amends RSA 644:8, IV-a(a), the animal cruelty statute, to allow an animal, suspected of being abused or neglected, to be taken into custody without a warrant.
House Criminal Justice Committee Members.

HB 1624 is proposed as a bill to stop “puppy mills” but it will impose unnecessary and onerous requirements on responsible dog owners and breeders. Education about and enforcement of the current laws, such as the requirement of a health certificate and the veterinary medical practice act, would be more effective than HB 1624 .  The Dept. of Agriculture rules  (AGR 1702) referenced in the bill can be found at  http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rules/state_agencies/agr1700.html

House Environment and Agriculture Committee Members

HB 1639 -relative to the tethering of dogs amends RSA 644:8, IV-a(a), the animal cruelty statute, to allow an animal, suspected of being abused or neglected, to be taken into custody without a warrant even if there is no imminent danger to the animal’s health. Here is the proposed change:

“any appropriate law enforcement officer, animal control officer, or officer of a duly licensed humane society may take into temporary protective custody any animal when there is probable cause to believe that it has been or is being abused or neglected in violation of paragraphs III or III-a or when there is a clear and imminent danger to the animal’s health or life and there is not sufficient time to obtain a court order.” Read more…