‘It will lead to the end of responsible breeding dogs.” “This is an attack on breeders.” “Law enforcement isn’t trained to know the difference between normal practices and this.”
These are the summary arguments given by the Dog Owners of New Hampshire and the N.H. Farm Bureau in 2016 when the N.H. Legislature passed a ban on the practice of bestiality. It may seem hard to fathom, but indeed these groups offered these arguments to a common-sense piece of legislation that is now law.
Now, these same groups have returned with the same arguments to try to defeat Senate Bill 569, a bill establishing specific penalties for animal cruelty.
Unlike two years ago, this proposal went to the House Agriculture Committee. Unfortunately, this is the same committee that rejected a proposed ban on animal fighting. Luckily for our state and its animals, the proposed bestiality ban went before the Criminal Justice Committee. That bill passed the committee and the full House by a unanimous vote.
This time around, the House Agriculture Committee has changed the animal cruelty bill so that it will seriously weaken laws that exist now. This committee is taking us in the wrong direction.
What is wrong with the new bill?
First, the new amendment calls for any complaint that is reported “shall not be made anonymously and the licensee, or his or her representative, may request and receive a copy of the full written complaint upon request.” This will have a chilling effect on reports of abuse and neglect.
You’ll recall the infamous Great Dane case in Wolfeboro started with an anonymous complaint made by a 16-year-old girl who was employed by the owner of the dogs. If this amendment was the law, the complaint would have to have been in writing and the Department of Agriculture would have required immediate notification to the defendant that her own employee made the complaint. It would never have seen the light of day, and Lord knows what would have happened to those poor animals.
In the case of children, reports of abuse and neglect are confidential and can be anonymous. This is to ensure people are comfortable coming forward. Why use a different standard in the case of animals?
Second, there is a so-called “carve out” exemption to not license most breeders in New Hampshire. There are currently only four commercial licensed breeders in New Hampshire and more than 80 licensed rescues. This amendment exempts any breeder that breeds dogs “for field work, drafting, guarding, working, herding livestock or hunting; or participating in any lawful dog event, including, but not limited to, conformation shows or obedience trials, field trials, agility events, hunts or mushing.” Put simply, this definition could include almost every dog and weakens the licensing and oversight of breeding.
Third, this amendment makes animal hoarding a criminal offense. While this may sound appealing to those who wish to protect animals from this behavior, criminalizing hoarding is both ineffective and inhumane. Hoarding is a mental health problem. Targeting people with mental health conditions is not an effective solution to this problem and is not the New Hampshire way to deal with it.
By placing in statute a first-time misdemeanor penalty followed by a secondary felony punishment is cruel in a situation where the recidivism rate has proven to be close 100 percent. The current animal cruelty code already addresses this.
Lastly, the amendment calls for a study committee stacked to not represent anyone from the rescue community, from law enforcement or municipalities. It consists of five members already publicly against strengthening animal cruelty laws. There already exists a Governor’s Commission on Humane Treatment of Animals, charged with studying costs of cruelty education and legislation. All of the stakeholders listed in this bill are on the commission. This is the appropriate body for such a review of our laws.
Animal cruelty is a sad reality in New Hampshire. There have been many high profile cases here, such as the incident involving Chihuahuas in Croydon in 2016, pit bulls in Berlin in 2017, German shepherds lost in the fire in Bristol in 2017, and 84 Great Danes in Wolfeboro in squalid conditions in 2017. It’s time for the Legislature to end the studies and take action to protect our animals from cruel acts.
(Rep. Katherine Rogers, a Concord Democrat, represents Merrimack District 28. Rep. David Danielson, a Bedford Republican, represents Hillsborough District 7.)