The debate surrounding House Bill 1766 has focused heavily on the notion that current livestock investigations lack fairness or oversight. The reality is that New Hampshire already has a system that balances animal welfare, due process, veterinary expertise and law enforcement authority.
In the Lee farm case frequently cited by supporters of HB 1766, professionals with expertise in goat care investigated concerns about the animals’ welfare. Licensed veterinarians were consulted, law enforcement determined there was probable cause, obtained a search warrant signed by a judge and executed the seizure of animals requiring protection. The goats were taken into protective custody and later surrendered by their owner. Criminal charges were not pursued, allowing for a humane resolution that prioritized both the welfare of the animals and the circumstances of the owner.
This case demonstrates that the current system works. It allows for professional assessment, judicial oversight, law enforcement involvement and compassionate outcomes when appropriate.
HB 1766 would not change the requirement that law enforcement obtain search warrants or execute seizures. Police officers are, and always have been, the only individuals authorized to seize property and carry out court orders. Veterinarians already play a critical role in determining when livestock are suffering and require intervention. Individuals whose animals are seized also have the opportunity to seek independent veterinary evaluations.
What HB 1766 does change is the role of animal cruelty investigators. These professionals conduct the preliminary work that helps determine whether concerns rise to the level of criminal neglect or cruelty. They work alongside veterinarians, law enforcement and species experts to ensure informed decisions are made. Removing their expertise creates a significant gap in New Hampshire’s ability to protect animals.
What most don’t know is that horses, ponies and rabbits are defined as livestock. Animal cruelty investigations rarely involve only one species. Cases frequently include dogs, cats, rabbits, birds, goats, horses and other animals living on the same property. Under HB 1766, investigators could find themselves unable to adequately respond simply because certain animals are classified as livestock. Humane organizations may also be prohibited from housing animals if they have participated as experts in the investigation, even when they are the only facilities equipped to provide proper care.
Supporters of HB 1766 suggest these changes are necessary to address deficiencies in the current system. Yet existing law already provides judicial oversight, veterinary involvement, law enforcement authority and opportunities for owners to challenge findings. There are no gaps that require removing experienced animal cruelty investigators from the process.
Through discussions on this legislation, animal welfare professionals offered opportunities to provide information, answer questions and explain how investigations are actually conducted. Those working directly in the field understand the complexities of these cases and the importance of collaboration among veterinarians, law enforcement and humane investigators. Almost every request was ignored.
This legislation is not about changing how search warrants are executed or strengthening due process protections that already exist. It is about limiting the role of professionals who have dedicated their careers to identifying suffering, preventing cruelty and protecting animals that cannot advocate for themselves.
New Hampshire’s animals deserve a system built on expertise, collaboration and compassion. Despite repeated attempts to engage in meaningful dialogue, nearly every offer of expertise was disregarded. HB 1766 weakens those protections and places vulnerable animals at greater risk; Gov. Kelly Ayotte should veto this bill and uphold New Hampshire’s commitment to animal welfare.
Lisa Dennison is the executive director of the New Hampshire SPCA based in Stratham.