THE HUMANE SOCIETY OF UTAH
4242 SOUTH 300 WEST
SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84107-1415
(801) 261-2919 phone • (801) 261-9577 fax
www.utahhumane.org
Page 1 of 1
PRESS RELEASE
RELEASE DATE: Immediately (January 25, 2008)
FOR MORE INFORMATION: Gene Baierschmidt (801) 261-2919 phone
HUMANE SOCIETY: SB 117 MUST NOT PASS!
The animal-welfare community has been thrown a curve ball by the introduction of Sen. Allen Christensen’s bill, SB 117. It changes the entire trajectory of the movement to pass "Henry’s Law," since it would not merely make deliberate animal torture a third-degree felony only when committed a second time within five years of the first act — it also removes many of the existing protections in the current animal code, thus weakening the entire animal cruelty code. If passed, SB 117 would set the state of Utah back decades in its regulations.
The Humane Society of Utah has never encountered a serial animal torturer in its long career of investigations. Anyone who would commit such an egregious act would be clever enough not to be caught doing it twice: Does anyone seriously think that when Michael Vick is released from prison he will fight dogs again? Obviously, the crime must be punishable on the first offense.
Sen. Gene Davis’s bill, SB 102, would make animal torture a third-degree felony on the first offense, and also retains the animal protections that are already in place. It was deliberately written to protect Utah’s farmers, ranchers, rodeo promoters, and agribusiness interests and was, in fact, endorsed by groups like the Farm Bureau and the Cattlemen’s association when it was introduced last year.
Specific examples of why we strongly OPPOSE SB 117 include the following:
Because a person would have to be convicted twice within five years before being charged with a felony-level offense, someone could, in front of witnesses, literally burn an animal alive or beat it to death over a long period of time and only be charged with a misdemeanor unless he did something similar within a five-year period.
Numerous new exemptions for prosecution of abuses to livestock, poultry, domestic furbearers, circuses, and rodeo animals are added. Animals that are presently covered by the animal abuse laws would no longer be protected from abusive owners and their employees. Recent examples would include the donkey that was dragged behind a pickup truck and the pheasant that was stomped on the field at a football game.
It semantically reduces the seriousness of the failure to provide necessary food, water, and shelter for non-excluded animals (dogs and cats and other household pets) from "animal cruelty" to "animal neglect." An attorney could argue that a client should not be judged harshly for allowing a dog to freeze to death in sub-zero weather because it was merely a case of neglect, not cruelty.
It would allow people to kill a dog, cat or any other animal to protect their property from destruction or substantial damage. This is vague enough to allow someone to shoot a neighbor’s dog for digging in their flowerbed or chewing up a neighbor’s child’s toy that the dog found in the defendant’s yard.
It adds further exclusions to prosecution for the handling and discipline of animals or livestock in accordance with accepted animal husbandry or customary farming practices. It could be argued that a person shouldn’t be charged with cruelty for beating his dog senseless or dangling and choking it on a chain.
Throughout the bill, undefined terms are used in its language which will be the basis of endless legal arguments as to the term’s meaning and intent. For "customary farming practices," who decides what is "customary" — the farmer? A group of local farmers? The Utah Farm Bureau? The Utah State Department of Agriculture? Who decides what is meant by "accepted rodeo practices" — the local rodeo operator? The rodeo stock contractor? A rodeo judge? The Professional Rodeo Cowboys Association? The International Gay Rodeo Association?
This law reflects attitudes that were reasonable in trhe 1800's and are no longer relevant. For example, it is still a felony to STEAL a horse — which would have been a serious offense when horses were society’s primary means of transportation and labor — but the individual who shot Crookneck the horse 50 times in the belly and left him to die a slow, agonizing death could only be charged with a misdemeanor.
The established strong link between violence to animals and violence against other human beings is reason enough to support SB 102. The flaws and weaknesses outlined above are more than sufficient arguments for opposing SB 117.
For more information, please call 261-2919.
# # # #