MA Dog Owners Blind-Sided
John Yates
Face Legislative Sucker Punch
by JOHN YATES
American Sporting Dog Alliance
http://www.americansportingdogalliance.org
as...@csonline.net
SPRINGFIELD, MA – Animal rights advocates in Massachusetts reached into
their bag of political dirty tricks last week to pave the way for
legislation that would be devastating to dog owners and circumvent public
participation in the process.
The legislation, which will be unveiled as House Bill 5092, would:
· Mandate spaying and neutering of all dogs at age 12 months.
· Create $500 annual “intact permits” for each dog that is not
sterilized, if they can meet almost impossible requirements to obtain a
permit.
· Essentially eliminate the breeding or keeping of intact dogs that
are registered with several major registries, including the Field Dog Stud
Book, the American Dog Breeders Association and numerous rare breed
organizations. A registry also would have to be specifically approved by
each municipality in the state.
· Limit intact permits only to dogs that have the physical
appearance of the show dog standard set by the American Kennel Club or the
United Kennel Club. Few purebred performance dogs of the sporting or
herding breeds physically resemble their show dog counterparts.
· Grant intact permits to dogs used in competition only if the local
municipality approves the dog’s registry. To get a permit, a dog owner
would have to be a “member” of a registry. Registries do not offer
memberships. Registries also would have to have a “code of ethics” that
prohibits breeding dogs with “genetic defects.” This is not defined and
thus is open to interpretation without clear guidelines. Genetic tests are
not available for most hereditary problems. No registry can meet this
standard, because of potential liability for matings over which they have
no control.
· Establish unreasonable nuisance definitions that will give
complete discretion to animal control officers to order the seizure,
destruction or banishment of a dog for even a single leash law violation,
noise complaint or trespass on another person’s property. There are no
guidelines in the bill. The legislation strictly limits the right of
appeal by requiring a dog owner to show that a citation was unreasonable
or in bad faith. A magistrate “may” grant a hearing on those grounds only,
but is not required to do so. In addition, unlike with other laws, a dog
owner cannot appeal the magistrate’s ruling to a higher court.
· Ban the tethering of all dogs, except for brief periods.
· Give broad powers to every municipality to ban or restrict
specific breeds of dogs, and to seize, ban or kill any dog that can be
deemed dangerous simply by briefly chasing another animal (chasing could
be construed as an “attack”). There is an appeal to a three-person board
of political appointees, including the animal control officer and
an “expert” in the field of animals.
· Require anyone who applies for an intact permit to attend training
classes on “responsible pet ownership.”
· Require anyone who sells a dog or puppy to turn in the names,
addresses and phone numbers of each buyer.
· And, impose fines and penalties, including possible imprisonment,
for violations.
The American Sporting Dog Alliance urges Massachusetts dog owners to be
aware that this is not simply another piece of legislation. Allies of
animal rights groups in the Legislature used a legal trick to rush this
bill through without the usual requirements for talking testimony from the
public or holding public hearings.
Here’s how it was done.
HB 1948, which was a reasonable bill aimed at regulating dangerous dogs
sponsored by Rep. Brad Hill, had been sent to the Joint Municipalities
Committee and sent to a file for “study.” That usually means the
legislation is dead for the current session. But the committee brought
back the bill, gutted it and replaced it with HB 5092. This new bill
contains the requirements described above. In turn, on Sept. 8, this
completely rewritten bill was sent to the House Steering, Policy, and
Scheduling Committee, which schedules legislation for a vote of the full
House.
The House Steering, Policy, and Scheduling Committee can send HB 5092 to
the House floor for a vote at anytime, with no advance notice required.
This procedural move eliminates requirements for a committee vote on the
bill or for a public hearing.
This process was confirmed on the committee website, under the status of
HB 5092. However, the veil of secrecy was intensified because the actual
text of the legislation was not provided on the House website. A search
yields only the original bill that was sponsored by Rep. Hill.
It is not known if Rep. Hill supports or opposes the gutted and completely
revised legislation, or if he played any role in the political chicanery
in making the switch. Hill did not respond to inquiries from the American
Sporting Dog Alliance.
The American Sporting Dog Alliance is urging all Massachusetts dog owners
to immediately take steps to fight against this dangerous and burdensome
legislation.
Please read this legislation for yourself. You can see it at
http://www.akc.org/pdfs/canine_legislation/MA_ht05092_3_.pdf.
The first step to fight this legislation is to ask the members of the
House Steering, Policy, and Scheduling Committee to refuse to send HB 5092
to the House floor for a vote. Please emphasize that the text of the
legislation has been completely changed, and that no opportunity has been
given for public participation on the new legislation.
Here is contact information for each member of the committee:
Representative Paul J. Donato
RM. 185
State House
Boston, MA 02133
PHONE: 617-722-2960
FAX: 617-722-2713
Rep.Pau...@hou.state.ma.us
Representative Joyce A. Spiliotis
RM. 236
State House
Boston, MA 02133
PHONE: 617-722-2430
Rep.Joyce...@hou.state.ma.us
Representative Paul C. Casey
RM. 238
State House
Boston, MA 02133
PHONE: 617-722-2380
Rep.Pa...@hou.state.ma.us
Representative James B. Eldridge
RM. 33
State House
Boston, MA 02133
PHONE: 617-722-2060
Rep.Jame...@hou.state.ma.us
Representative Alice Hanlon Peisch
RM. 167
State House
Boston, MA 02133
PHONE: 617-722-2230
Rep.Ali...@hou.state.ma.us
Representative Denis E. Guyer
RM. 443
State House
Boston, MA 02133
PHONE: 617-722-2460
Rep.Den...@hou.state.ma.us
Representative Tom Sannicandro
RM. 473F
State House
Boston, MA 02133
PHONE: 617-722-2210
FAX: 508-626-0692
Rep.TomSa...@hou.state.ma.us
Representative James T. Welch
RM. 43
State House
Boston, MA 02133
PHONE: 617-722-2030
Rep.Jam...@hou.state.ma.us
Representative Lori A. Ehrlich
RM. 540
State House
Boston, MA 02133
PHONE: 617-722-2090
Rep.Lor...@hou.state.ma.us
Representative Bradford Hill
RM. 542
State House
Boston, MA 02133
PHONE: 617-722-2489
Rep.Br...@hou.state.ma.us
Representative Elizabeth A. Poirier
RM. 542
State House
Boston, MA 02133
PHONE: 617-722-2976
FAX: 617-626-0108
Rep.Elizab...@hou.state.ma.us
Although emails usually are the least effective way to communicate with
legislators, we suggest starting with an email in this case because this
legislation may be moved very quickly. However, we also ask you to fax,
send a letter or phone in addition to sending an email.
We also are asking Massachusetts residents to contact their own state
representatives and senators.
Here is a link for the representatives:
http://www.mass.gov/legis/memmenuh.htm.
Here is a link for the senators: http://www.mass.gov/legis/memmenus.htm.
The American Sporting Dog Alliance is starting to see a pattern in anti-
dog-owner legislation that is being unveiled this summer, and the
Massachusetts bill fits this pattern.
Legislation is being promoted vigorously by the radical Humane Society of
the United States (HSUS) in states that the polls indicate are likely to
be won by Barrack Obama in the November presidential election. The list
includes Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and now
Massachusetts.
Regardless of the outcome nationally, an Obama victory in those states
would carry many liberal Democratic state senators and legislators into
office on his coattails. Liberal Democrats tend to be the major supporters
of animal rights legislation. The likely goal of HSUS is to help liberal
Democrats capture or hold onto control of state legislatures in Obama-
leaning states.
We can speculate that HSUS might be offering political support in return
for “yes” votes on animal rights legislation, or commitments by candidates
to support similar legislation next year. Obama supported animal rights
legislation during the primary campaign, but has been silent on this issue
in recent months.
HSUS is a radical animal rights group that is working to reduce and
ultimately eliminate the private ownership of animals in America. HSUS
does not operate animal shelters and has no relationship with
local “humane societies” that actually help animals. HSUS is a political
organization in the animal rights movement.
The American Sporting Dog Alliance represents owners, breeders and
professionals who work with breeds of dogs that are used for hunting. We
welcome people who work with other breeds, too, as legislative issues
affect all of us. We are a grassroots movement working to protect the
rights of dog owners, and to assure that the traditional relationships
between dogs and humans maintains its rightful place in American society
and life.
The American Sporting Dog Alliance also needs your help so that we can
continue to work to protect the rights of dog owners. Your membership,
participation and support are truly essential to the success of our
mission. We are funded solely by the donations of our members, and
maintain strict independence.
Please visit us on the web at http://www.americansportingdogalliance.org.
Our email is AS...@csonline.net. Complete directions to join by mail or
online are found at the bottom left of each page.
PLEASE CROSS-POST AND FORWARD THIS REPORT TO YOUR FRIENDS