by George J. Eigenhauser Jr.
(an attorney at law licensed in the State of California since 1979 and practices in the areas of civil litigation and estate planning)

ANTI-PET ENFORCEMENT
What Every Pet Owner Needs to Know

Pet owners and ethical breeders are increasingly being targeted. Disgruntled neighbors may retaliate against pet owners and many other reasons drive complaints, and anti-pet enforcement action, which many times may be conducted illegally. The following text outlines methods of inquiry and enforcement which may be used by local officials in attempts to enforce ordinances in your community and suggested techniques of response. These techniques are entirely legal and based upon the rights of citizens as stated by the U.S. Constitution. No one wants to have Animal Control come knocking on the door…but if they do, it will help if you know what your options are.
Remember, Animal Control is law enforcement. They are bound by the same Constitution as any other government agency. To protect yourself, you need to know your rights. These vary slightly one jurisdiction to another, but some general principles apply. One rule applies everywhere: never physically resist an officer.

When Animal Control is At Your Door:

1. Do not let them in, no matter how much they ask. Animal Control generally cannot enter your home without a warrant, or your permission. While regular police can enter in emergency situations when human life is at risk (i.e. they hear gunshots and a scream inside), there are few, if any, situations in which Animal Control can enter your home without a warrant. Simply tell them they may not come in.

2. If you let them in, anything they find in “plain sight” can be used against you. In some circumstances Animal Control officers, unable to find a legitimate reason to make an arrest, have reported building or zoning violations. This may include caging you attached to a wall without a building permit, that extra outlet in the puppy room, having more pets than allowed by zoning, even extension cords in violation of fire codes! No matter how clean your kennel, if they want to find a violation, they will.

3. Do not talk to them from an open doorway. Step outside an close (and lock if possible) the door behind you. This is necessary because:

• Anything they see through the open door is “plain sight” and may be the basis for an arrest, or probable cause for a search warrant.
• If they make an arrest or even feel threatened they are usually permitted to search for weapons in your immediate area. Do you keep a baseball bat inside the door for your protection? Even if you don’t, once they step inside to look, they are in your home and may continue to search.
• It is hard not to be intimidated by someone in authority. Some animal control is even done by local police, who carry guns. It is easy for them to get “in your face”, causing you to back up into the home. Once you go in, it will be interpreted as an invitation to follow.

4. If they claim to have a warrant, demand to see it. In general, a search warrant must be signed by a judge. A warrant to search your home for pets does not include an inventory of your jewelry box. A warrant to search your kennel in the garage or in the barn does not include a search of your home.

5. In some locations, pet owners may have obtained special “breeder permits” that stipulate that Animal Control has your permission to enter at any time. If you have signed such a permit they still cannot enter against your wishes, since you can revoke the permission at any time. However, if you refuse permission it may allow them to cancel your breeder permit, so you have to weigh the consequences.

6. Warning – anyone in lawful possession of the premises may be able to give permission for a search. Make sure your roommate, babysitter, pet-sitter, housekeeper and other know that they should not let animal control into your home or on your property (i.e.backyard, garage, etc.).

How to Handle Questions:

1. Don’t answer any questions beyond identifying yourself for the officer. Anything you say to the officer in your defense cannot be used in court (hearsay). Anything you say that is harmful to you will be used in court (confessions are not considered hearsay). You cannot win, except by remaining silent.

2. Be polite but firm. Do not argue, bad-mouth, curse, threaten or try to intimidate the officer.

3. Do not lie to an officer, ever. However, it is NOT a lie to exercise your right to remain silent.

4. Keep your hands in plain sight. People have been shot by police when common objects, such as a wallet, were mistaken for a gun.

5. Do not touch the officer in any way. Do not physically resist an officer, no matter how unlawful his or her actions.

6. Don’t try to tell your side of the story, it cannot help.

7. Do not threaten the officer that you plan to file a complaint for their actions.

8. If the questioning persists, demand to speak to a lawyer first. Repeat as necessary.

Gathering the Facts:

1. Get the name and badge number of each officer involved. If he/she does not volunteer this information, ask.

2. Ask the name of the agency they represent. Different agencies have different enforcement responsibilities.

3. Ask why they are there. Request the factual basis of the complaint and the identity of the complainant.

4. If they have other people with them (Humane Society, press, etc.) get the names and organizations for all present.

5. Note the names (and addresses) of any witnesses to the encounter.

6. If you are physically injured by an officer, you should take photographs of the injuries immediately, but do not forego proper medical treatment first.

7. Write down all of the information, as well as the date and time of the incident immediately, while details are fresh in your mind.

8. If you rights are violated, file a complaint with the appropriate body.

If You Are Arrested:

1. Remain silent. Answer no questions until you have consulted with a lawyer.

2. Don’t “explain” anything. You will have time for explanations after you have talked to a lawyer

3. Within a reasonable time they must allow you to make a phone call to get a lawyer or arrange bail. They are not allowed to listen to your phone call to your attorney, but they may “monitor” the rooms for “your protection”. Do not say anything you do not want them to overhear; save that until after you are out on bail.

Telephone Inquiries or Threats:

You may receive telephone inquiries concerning the number of pets you own and whether any dogs or kittens are for sale. Other questions may also be asked. Your response should be to inquire “Are you interested in a puppy?”. If the answer is “yes”, ask that person for his/her name, address and phone number. Suggest that you or a responsible breeder will contact that person at a more convenient time for you. If the answer is friendly and genuinely inquisitive, invite the person to look at your puppies. If the question asked is “What is the price of each puppy?”, simply say that puppies of this type are being sold for between “X” and “Y” dollars. Never say that you are selling them. If the question asked is “Are these your puppies?”, you should ask, “Why do you want to know?”. If you conversation indicates that the person is representing the county clerk’s office or allegedly representing an official body, ask the caller for: -Full name, title and phone number -Agency’s full name and full address -Their supervisor’s full name and phone number -Nature of the inquiry (what it is about) -Why the inquiry is being made -How your name and phone number were obtained -Ask that all future questions from that agency be submitted in writing

Preventative Measures:

1. Always keep you kennel clean and take good care of your animals.

2. Consider a P.O. Box or other address for business cards and advertisements. Keep descriptions of your location general ( i.e. Southern California , rather than the name of the city where you live). The internet can provide anonymity for initial contacts. You can even buy a “remote prefix” to get a number from a nearby community forwarded to your phone or to a voice mail. Avoid local newspaper classifieds, they are often monitored.

3. Screen any potential pet buyers carefully. Always be alert that they may be Animal Control or even Animal Rights working under cover.

4. Don’t allow strangers into your home until you have screened them.

5. Be fair and honest in all of your dealings, and be on good terms with your neighbors. Most animal control contacts are complaint-driven. Some complaints may arise as harassment by people with unrelated grievances against you. It may be a disgruntled pet buyer or a cranky neighbor who doesn’t like you parking in front of his house.

6. Anything about you that can be observed in “plain sight” from the street or sidewalk can become probably cause for a warrant. Even areas on your property open to visitors can be dangerous. Be aware of which areas of your home are visible from the outside and plan accordingly.

7. If you are confronted by Animal Control and turn them away, assume they will be back. Use the time available to make sure everything is clean and presentable. If you are over the limit on the number of pets, find friends who can provide temporary shelter for your dogs. Whatever you do, stay calm and keep your wits about you. Just say “no”, no matter what threats or promises of leniency they make. When in doubt, say nothing and speak to a lawyer afterwards.

And word was sent to the man who lives among them — the dogs’ very lifeline. It would be the job of their caretaker — the man who fed them, attended to them; the man who named them, and even kept one of them as his family dog — to kill them.

Reports that I have read say that he tried to find homes for as many as he could. And he was largely unsuccessful. The BC SPCA reportedly turned him down saying that sled dogs are unadoptable. This is not true.

But what I read that has stuck with me the most was the report released from Work Safe BC:

“As a result of the panic, mid-way through April 21st, he wounded but did not kill one dog, “Suzie”. Suzie was the mother of his family’s pet dog “Bumble”. He had to chase Suzie through the yard because the horrific noise she made when wounded caused him to drop the leash. Although she had the left side of her cheek blown off and her eye hanging out, he was unable to catch her. He then obtained a gun with a scope and used it to shoot her when she settled down close to another group of dogs. When he went to gather her body he was attacked by one of the other dogs and bitten in the arm. Although because he had a thick shirt on he was not injured, the moment was horrific given his fear when attacked combined with his feelings about the culling of the dogs.”

“On April 21 ,2010, he put down approximately 55 dogs. As he neared the end of the cull that day, the dogs were so panicked they were biting him; he had to wrap his arms in foam to prevent injury. He also had to perform what he described as “execution style” killings where he wrestled the dogs to the ground and stood on them with one foot to shoot them. The last few kills were “multiple-shot killings” as he was simply unable to get a clean shot. He described a guttural sound he had never heard before from the dogs and fear in their eyes.”

I do not doubt that this man has PTSD. I would be forever haunted. I want to scream at the computer that he could have done more and should have done more. But I have not walked in his shoes to fully understand.

Instead I feel that on some level, in some parallel universe, or sadly in THIS universe, we ALL failed these dogs. We failed to realize the nature of this industry to periodically cull their dogs for business’ sake. We have failed to pull together as a society to be open and responding to their needs, we failed to help these babies..

Most rescues and shelters are full… and likely responded as such if/when they were approached by Outdoor Adventures Whistler. Would/could they have responded differently if they had realized the very real urgency here?

As we finally start to really embrace a more humane lifestyle for our animals — pets, farm animals and wildlife, we must make ourselves available to the situations we encounter and respond appropriately. Both the situations that we know of and those that will arise. We need to improve our animal welfare legislation. We need to stop animals from being categorized as mere property and respect their sentience. We need to create a more effective countrywide network of rescues and shelters so that people in trouble can more easily tap into this community of caregivers when they need help. We need to do it for the animals.

On April 23, 2010, the last of the dogs were killed. And not in a pretty or humane way. They died terrified.

On April 23, 2011 in many communities across the globe, people will be marching or gathering in vigil to the victims who were given no say about their very own lives, the ONE thing that truly is our own. It’s not too late to organize your own vigil — whether it is a march, a gathering in a park or even inviting your friends to join you in your backyard. In remembrance of these dogs, we MUST enact better legislation for the welfare of our animals. And we must enact stiffer penalties for animal abuse/cruelty.

And remember: Get out and vote. Reading a blog or carrying signs for the news cameras won’t change the world. Voting can.

More photos of Outdoor Adventure Whistler sled dogs | Thanks to Amie Wills for posting their photos

HB 3450 would mandate practices that have ended killing across the country!

Houston shelters kill roughly 80,000 animals a year. San Antonio, Dallas, and other shelters kill tens of thousands as well. But that number will soon plummet if legislation introduced into the Texas Legislature becomes law. The Texas Companion Animal Protection Act (CAPA), H.B. 3450 introduced by Representative Jessica Farrar, would require shelters to follow practices that allowed communities like Austin, Texas to save 92% of all dogs and cats last month.

Similar laws have been passed elsewhere including California, where it was passed with overwhelming bipartisan support (96 to 12) and signed into law by the then-state’s Republican governor. In Delaware, it passed both houses of the legislature unanimously. And parts of it are in place in Austin, Texas, where the City Council voted 7-0 in favor.

CAPA mandates policies and procedures which not only helped Austin end the killing of savable animals, but that have created No Kill communities nationwide including Reno, Nevada, Shelby County, Kentucky, Marquette, Michigan, Tompkins County, New York, and elsewhere.

If passed, CAPA would:

1. abolish the gas chamber;
2. abolish “heart sticks” as a method of “euthanasia” except under certain specific
   circumstances;
3. ban “convenience killing” (killing when there are empty cages);
4. mandate collaboration by requiring shelters to work with non-profit rescue
   organizations to maximize lifesaving;
5. mandate transparency by requiring shelters to report how many animals they kill;.
6. ban the killing of animals based on arbitrary criteria such as breed, age or color;
7. prohibit selling shelter animals to research labs;

And more……

Texas CAPA is based on model legislation written by the No Kill Advocacy Center.

If history is any guide, CAPA will face opposition from shelters who do not want to be regulated, and the large, national organizations which defend those shelters.

We need your help to pass this law. Texas CAPA was recently sent to the Public Health committee for consideration. The members of the Public Health committee need to know that you support this bill.

Please telephone, send a letter, e-mail each committee member to express your support for the H.B. 3450 aka the Companion Animal Protection Act.

We have created a sample letter for you to use.  Please personalize your letters before mailing or faxing.

Click here for contact information for Public Health committee members.

If you can’t send a letter, please sign our petition. When you sign the petition, it will send an email to each committee member.  There is a space to write your own comments.  Please do personalize your email.

Please also contact committee members through their Facebook and Twitter pages asking them to support this bill. Click here for links.

Talking points FOR HB 3450

CAPA saves the lives of animals
A 2010 statewide survey of rescue groups in New York State found that 71% of non-profit animal welfare groups have had at least one NYS shelter refuse to work collaboratively and then turn around and kill the very animals they were willing to save.  This is also happening in shelters across Texas.  This is inhumane and bad policy.  CAPA would make it illegal for a shelter to kill an animal when a qualified non-profit organization, that specializes in adoptions, is willing to save that animal. This maximizes the number of animals who are saved, while reducing the numbers killed.

CAPA saves taxpayers money from having to care for, kill, and dispose of animals
CAPA is modeled after a similar law which has been in effect in California since 1998. An analysis of that law found that sending animals to non-profit animal rescue organizations saved the City and County of San Francisco $486,480 in publicly funded animal control costs. CAPA saves taxpayer money by mandating public-private partnerships that not only reduce expenses associated with having to care for, then kill and dispose of an animal, but which transfers expenses from taxpayers to private philanthropy.

CAPA improves the emotional well-being of shelter staff
Studies show that staff members responsible for killing animals in shelters are vulnerable to emotional trauma, exhaustion, and burnout. CAPA would spare staff from killing animals when those animals have readily available lifesaving options.

CAPA protects public health and safety
CAPA specifically excludes dangerous dogs and animals who are irremediably suffering from untreatable diseases or injuries.  It also requires shelter to implement best practices that reduce disease, ensure animals are medically screened, thus protecting both employee and public welfare.

CAPA puts Texas on par with the most progressive states in the country
CAPA is based on a similar law in California which was passed in 1998 with overwhelming bipartisan support—96 to 12. It made no sense to California legislators that taxpayers were spending money on killing animals when non-profit organizations were willing to spend their own money to save them.  Legislators also found that public shelters that killed animals, when those animals have a place to go, did not reflect the humane values of their constituents. In addition, the State of Delaware recently passed similar legislation unanimously. And New York State is considering a similar law this year.

reprinted from Bett Sundermeyer’s email

Bett Sundermeyer, President
No Kill Houston
NoKillHouston@yahoo.com
www.NoKillHouston.org

<hr>

Question: Why are Canada’s Harp seals being found further south these days?

Seals from Canada found as far south as N. Carolina

That’s the title of an article in USA Today Monday. It goes on to say that, “Harp seals from Canada are showing up in U.S. waters in greater numbers and farther south than usual, and biologists want to know why.”

My first thought was “because if they stay in Canada, they will be bludgeoned to death for seal products that no one but Canada’s Federal Fisheries Minister, Gail Shea wants.” Seems obvious to me.

Wouldn’t it just be great if that was the reason they were leaving Canada? That they realize their possible fate if they remain there? Surely you have seen the photos where seals are being smacked in the head with some killing tool and several feet away, other seals just lay and await their fate. Everything about that picture makes my heart hurt.

Wouldn’t it just be so appropriate if they decided, “To hell with it. These people mean us only harm. Let’s get the hell out of here once and for all.”

Anyway, without spending millions of dollars to research why the Harp seals are heading south, that is my opinion. They are tired of being smacked up the side of their head for no good reason. GO SEALS!

Here’s the article:

“The government of Canada is wasting the hard earned money of Canadians to fight a battle that the citizens of the European Union have said is already lost,” said Sheryl Fink, Director of IFAW’s Seal Program, “the EU does not want products from commercial seal hunts, period.”

Launching a formal challenge at the World Trade Organization could take more than three years, and there is no guarantee that it will be successful. Canadian taxpayers will be footing a bill that will run into the millions. Polling has shown that the majority of Canadians are opposed to the use of government funds to challenge the EU seal product ban at the WTO, and would rather see their taxes used to phase out the hunt.

“The seal trade ban was written in anticipation of a WTO challenge and is expected to comply fully with the EU’s international obligations,” said Lesley O’Donnell, IFAW EU Director. “Once the open consultations at the WTO begin in Geneva the world will see and hear once again just how indefensible Canada’s commercial seal hunt really is and how completely unnecessary it is to the economy of a G8 country.”

The EU has previously made it clear that it will “vigorously defend” the values of EU citizens in the face of a WTO challenge.

“The Canadian government should be investing money to help Atlantic Canadians by supporting industries that don’t stain our international reputation, not wasting it on life-support for the dying seal hunt,” Fink added. “IFAW and our supporters fought hard to achieve this ban. You can be sure we will be speaking out to defend it.”

For more information, please contact

IFAW Canada
Michelle Cliffe, Communications Officer
647-986-IFAW (4329)
mcliffe@ifaw.org
Twitter: @michellecliffe

Kentucky, North Dakota, Idaho, Mississippi and Iowa are the five best states in the country to be an animal abuser, according to a new report released today by the Animal Legal Defense Fund (ALDF). Based on a detailed comparative analysis of more than 4,000 pages of statutes, tracking fourteen broad categories of provisions, the report recognizes the states where animal law has real teeth, and calls out those like Kentucky — the single worst in the nation for animal protection laws for the fourth year running — where animal abusers get off easy. ALDF’s fifth annual state rankings report, the longest-running and most authoritative report of its kind, ranks all fifty states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico and other U.S. territories for the general comprehensiveness and relative strength of their respective animal protection laws.

Why are these five states in the dog house when it comes to getting tough on animal abuse? The legislative weaknesses seen in the states at the bottom of the animal protection barrel include severely restricted or absent felony animal cruelty provisions, inadequate animal fighting provisions, and lack of restrictions on the future ownership of animals for those convicted of cruelty to animals.

On the other end of the spectrum, this year’s “best five for animals” list remains unchanged from 2009, with Illinois, Maine, Michigan, Oregon and California demonstrating through their laws the strongest commitment to combating animal cruelty; for the fourth consecutive year, Illinois was the very best of the best for the strength of its laws protecting animals. Alaska showed the most improvement, moving from 44th last year to 37th overall this year. West Virginia, Minnesota, Oklahoma and Arizona all improved their standings due, in part, to the adoption of laws that allow animals to be included in domestic violence protective orders.

“While many states continue to make positive progress for animals, there are, unfortunately, still many places where the laws are incapable of providing the legal protections that our country’s animals need and deserve,” says Stephan Otto, Animal Legal Defense Fund’s director of legislative affairs and author of the report. “Even in those jurisdictions that have today’s best laws, there remain many opportunities for improvement. Animals do not vote — but those who love them do. We encourage lawmakers throughout the country to take heed and commit to working to improve these critical laws.”

ALDF was founded in 1979 with the unique mission of protecting the lives and advancing interests of animals through the legal system. For more information, including a copy of the state rankings report and a free downloadable version of the complete compendium of state anti-cruelty laws (US and Canada) on which the report is based, please visit www.aldf.org.

2010 State Animal Protection Laws Rankings
Comparing Overall Strength & Comprehensiveness

Note: The District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, Virgin Islands and other territories are included in this report and are italicized. The Best Five and Worst Five categories are limited to states.

Annual Animal Protection Laws Rankings Reports
United States: 2006 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010
Canada: 2008 | 2009 | 2010

With the millions of cats and dogs killed each year across the world, the question is “can you love some more?” Can you open your heart and your home to adopt another cat or dog?

More than sharing their stories and their photos, THEY NEED HOMES.

Will you step up?

Think how the numbers would change if everyone who says they are an animal lover adopted a cat or dog from a rescue or a shelter.

Think of the impact and the lives saved.

Please… think about it, then step up and love some more.

If you compare the number of animals killed in a community shelter to the city’s population of people, it requires only a small percentage of people to empty a shelter of it’s healthy, adoptable animals.

For example: say you live in a city where there are 285,000 people. And say the average family consists of four people. 285,000 divided by 4 = 71,250 families.

Say your local shelter kills 2500 animals in a year. 2500 animals divided by 71,250 families = .035. That number represents the percentage of households needed to save all the shelter animals euthanized in a year in our sample community. — 3.5% of the community’s households.

This sample was generated from the actual numbers for 2009 from an actual Canadian city.

Add another percentage and I bet the area rescues will be empty, too.

When you look at it that way, you can begin to get your head around how needless the killing really is.

FREE AT LAST!

Word is slowly making its way across the universe…. Brindi has been released and is finally home again! After 715 days.

Specifically, the message on Facebook reads like this:

I am THRILLED to report to you that in an unexpected development, I learned this morning that the judge’s assistant told HRM’s lawyer if they signed off on the fence, I could take Brindi home without having to appear in court!!

Done and done!!! She’s pooped out next to me on the bed right now, after a long hot afternoon. But she is getting right back into the swing of things, so fast, just so great!!

THANK YOU EVERYBODY!!! Please give me a bit of time to sort out photos and things and you’ll get all the details!

LOVE AND HUGS,

Francesca

………

Just 19 days shy of two years ago, Brindi was seized by the city of Halifax in July 2008.

This is incredible news! Kudos to a well-deserved reunion. Our best wishes to them both for a very long and happy life together again!

Holly

I wonder if Judge Murphy knows the extended joy felt in waves around the world yesterday as news of her ruling circumnavigated the world faster than the speed of sound or light.

I wonder if she has any idea how much happiness she created within the hearts of more people than she can perhaps imagine. People from most countries of the world. People that have stood by for almost two years as Francesca Rogier has fought for the life of her companion, her dog Brindi.

Yesterday afternoon in a Dartmouth, Nova Scotia courthouse, Judge Alanna Murphy created just such a tsunami when she ruled that Brindi would be released* from the city’s relentless 20-month stranglehold.

Yesterday afternoon, Judge Murphy let us know that the light at the end of the tunnel was NOT yet another train coming, but an opening back into the life Francesca and Brindi had barely started together.

Brindi supporters from around the world are rejoicing as messages of happiness continue to pour in.

Thank you, Judge Murphy, for choosing life over death; for giving Francesca and Brindi the much-asked chance to shine in the community!

You are world class to us one and all!

To Francesca, Brindi and Amelia — best wishes for a long and wonderful future!

Ciao, Holly

* Conditions for the release include: Francesca and Brindi must take training courses, Francesca must ensure there is a secure enclosure for Brindi at her home; Brindi must be muzzled when she is outside.

Contact info for Judge Murphy if you want to send a thank you:

Judge Alanna Murphy

Dartmouth Provincial Court Administration

277 Pleasant Street

Dartmouth, NS, B2Y3S2 CANADA

Fax: (902) 424-0677

Related articles by Zemanta

• Brindi the dog spared death (cbc.ca)
• Brindi death decision reserved (cbc.ca)
• Court to decide fate of seized dog (cbc.ca)
• N.S. woman spends $30,000 fighting for dog’s life (ctv.ca)