URGENT: HSUS Raid Planned for Central Tennessee

We have received information that HSUS is planning a breeder raid for

the central Tennessee area, or surrounding areas, in the next several

days. They have been asking for volunteers able to foster around

120-150 dogs by next Wednesday, February 2. They are also asking for

volunteers able to take part in the raid. We have been told that the

raid will be in central Tennessee, but it could be in a surrounding

state close by (MS, KY, etc.). They often conduct these raids on

weekends.

Rescue groups are also at risk during raids such as these.

If you are a breeder with large numbers of dogs in these areas,

please take precautions. They may have already visited your property

to get probable cause for a warrant. At this point all you may be

able to do is remove dogs before they are seized. If you have reason

to think that you could be the subject of such a raid, please protect

yourself and your dogs. Have an attorney ready and remove dogs ahead

of time.

This message is only aimed at breeders with larger numbers of dogs

who may be targeted by HSUS in these areas.

crossposting encouraged

National Pet Week

May 2-8: National Pet Week

May 2-8: Be Kind to Animals Week

This is a very good week to contact legislators about anything animal-related. Remember that SB 3850, the rabies tax, is still in the Senate Finance, Ways & Means committee. It's been deferred a couple of times and it will be heard on 5/11. The house version of the bill, HB 3834, has been sent to the House Finance, Ways & Means committee. Please continue to spread the word about these bills and ask people to contact the committee members.

It's also a good week to contact your legislators and remind them that HSUS does not speak for animal lovers. If you belong to the Tennessee Pet-Law e-list you can check the TN Pet-Law files for a Letter-to-Legislators.doc and HSUS Gets It Wrong. Similar letters and statements are being sent to legislators this week in other states.

Keep us posted if people in middle and west Tennessee need help. I know the national news isn't covering it as much as they should.

Proposed rabies fee spurs dogfight

http://www.timesfreepress.com/news/2010/may/03/proposed-rabies-fee-spurs-dogfight/

http://tinyurl.com/3ab5trb

Proposed rabies fee spurs dogfight

By: Andy Sher

NASHVILLE -- With Tennessee's budget already going to the dogs, state health officials want permission to tack a $1 fee on rabies vaccinations to continue funding investigations into potential cases of the deadly disease.

Veterinarians are barking mad about the plan. Lawmakers, meanwhile, are baring their teeth at each other with a top Democrat accusing some GOP critics of preening like peacocks with their opposition.

Underscoring the tension is a stark fiscal reality: In a three-year period ending July 1, 2011, recession-battered tax revenues will have forced Tennessee to slash general state spending by an estimated $1.5 billion or 21 percent. It also doesn't help that a fight is brewing over the proposed 2010-11 budget.

"I'm just opposed to us adding a tax, a fee in this economic environment and putting the costs of this program on the backs of citizens that are now trying to be law abiding and have their animals vaccinated," said Rep. Joey Hensley, R-Hohenwald, arguing that fewer animals would be vaccinated because of the fee.

Only one in five dogs and cats is vaccinated by their owners, say veterinarians, most of whom oppose the $1 fee.

Rep. Hensley's comments came last week in a House Health and Human Resources Committee.

House Democratic Caucus Chairman Mike Turner, however, countered that "we're talking about eliminating services. ... Everybody's talking about 'I'm against something,' but no alternatives have been brought up yet how we're going to do this."

He predicted "this next couple of weeks is going to be real interesting, especially with all these peacocks putting their feathers out and really pontificating."

MAKING THE CASE

The state Health Department wants authority to impose up to a $2 fee on rabies vaccinations to avoid cutting17 to 24 environmentalists whose jobs include inspecting restaurants, hotels and swimming pools and investigating animal bites and possible rabies outbreaks.

Officials maintain the fee would be $1 although they acknowledge it could be raised in future years. The plan would generate about $1 million for the $1.8 million program, now paid for through general fund revenues. The state conducted nearly 2,800 investigations last year. There were 89 cases of rabies, most of them stemming not from pets but wild animals such as bats and raccoons.

There were five cases in which humans were exposed.

"Is it worth $1 million to find five cases of rabies?" asked Rep. Vance Dennis, R-Savannah.

Replied Cookeville veterinarian Steven Copeland: "It is if you're one of the five cases."

Dr. Copeland, who supported the proposal, said most of his colleagues oppose it.

The committee eventually passed the measure out on a 16-10 vote. All 10 no votes were cast by Republicans. Rep. Vince Dean, R-East Ridge, was among the nays. Rep. JoAnne Favors, D-Chattanooga, a registered nurse, voted in favor of it.

The bill now goes to the House Budget Subcommittee. It passed the Senate General Welfare Committee earlier in the session on a 6-1 vote. Sen. Bo Watson, R-Hixson, was the lone no vote.

While some Republicans are disturbed over the $1 fee to raise $1 million, most have shown little concern about voting for a 3.52 percent fee or assessment on hospitals that would raise $310 million and attract additional federal funding to offset TennCare cuts.

Hospitals have asked for the assessment. But most veterinarians are vehemently opposed to the $1 fee on rabies vaccinations. Dr. Randy Hammon, a Chattanooga veterinarian and past president of the Tennessee Veterinary Medical Association, has testified against the fee.

"If we end up having an increased cost in the rabies vaccination, that's going to discourage people from vaccinating their pets," he said last week in an interview.

Dr. Hammon said one of the problems is that local governments already charge pet licensing fees. In Hamilton County, those fees range from $3 to $50 depending on whether a pet has been spayed or neutered.

"What we worry about is the best way not to pay those fees is not to have your pet vaccinated for rabies," Dr. Hammon said.

It also hasn't helped that some revenue-hungry lawmakers wanted to add additional fees to rabies vaccinations to cover pet neutering and even meals-on-wheels programs for the elderly. Both those ideas, however, have been dropped.

As the House debate appeared to be on the verge of spiraling out of control last week, Health Commissioner Susan Cooper dashed back to the Capitol from the airport, where she had been scheduled to fly to Washington for a conference highlighting the state's special work in diabetes, a program that has been reduced to one-year funding.

"We have eliminated programs over the course of the past three years that have served people," she reminded lawmakers. "We have capped programs that are for people that have HIV and AIDS."

The bottom line, she said is, "we have cut to the bone already and what we're trying to do again is to maintain those absolutely necessary programs to protect public health."

If the fees aren't approved, she said, "it is likely this program will diminish in size." She downplayed concerns some pet owners would forego vaccinations if a fee is implemented.

What's next

House Bill 3834 is scheduled to be heard Tuesday in the House Budget Subcommittee. The Senate version, Senate Bill 3850, is on the Wednesday calendar of the Senate Finance Committee.

OPPOSE SB 3367 Holding Period for Animals

I'd like to call your attention to another bill we've been

following. This is SB 3367. This bill originally had the stated

purpose of extending the holding period for animals in private

shelters from 72 hours to 120 hours. However, the House has added a

very troubling amendment that would allow shelter or humane society

officers to destroy seized animals for the purposes of "population

control." This could mean that animals seized in animal cruelty

cases (such as breeders' animals) could be destroyed while the

defendant is waiting for trial. Not only is that a problem, but

extending the required holding period for animals from 72 hours to

120 hours is itself a problem. No one seems to have considered who

is going to pay for the extra two days of care for these animals or

where they are going to be kept when the shelters are full.

Please contact the members of the Senate Judiciary committee below

and ask them to OPPOSE SB 3367. This bill is on the calendar now.

Below is my letter to Sen. Beavers, the chairman of the committee,

which I copied to all of the committee members.

Carlotta

sen.mae.beavers@capitol.tn.gov, sen.doug.jackson@capitol.tn.gov,

sen.doug.overbey@capitol.tn.gov, sen.diane.black@capitol.tn.gov,

sen.dewayne.bunch@capitol.tn.gov, sen.mike.faulk@capitol.tn.gov,

sen.brian.kelsey@capitol.tn.gov, sen.jim.kyle@capitol.tn.gov,

sen.beverly.marrero@capitol.tn.gov

Dear Senator Beavers,

I'm writing you as head of the Senate Judiciary Committee about

Senate Bill 3367, the bill that would extend the holding period for

animals from 72 hours to 120 hours. This bill was already

problematic from the start but the amendments added to it in the

House make it genuinely alarming.

I realize that it sounds very appealing and compassionate to extend

the holding time for animals at a shelter/humane society from 72

hours to 120 hours but a couple of important questions need to be

asked. How are shelters going to pay to house and care for these

animals during this additional time? And, where are they going to

house the animals when the shelters become over-crowded? The fiscal

note for this bill says there will be no impact to state government.

However, it's impossible to believe that local shelters will not need

a great deal of additional funding from some source to care for these

animals for longer periods of time. This needs to be carefully

considered before this bill is voted on.

In regard to the amendments added by the House, Amendment 1 would

have very serious consequences. It states that agents or officers of

a shelter or humane society may destroy seized animals for purposes

of "population control." Not only is "population control" a vague

concept which could mean over-crowding in the shelter or population

control on a national level, but these actions could lead to

destroying animals being held in court cases before a trial. This

would deny a defendant due process of law or the possibility of

having his/her animals returned at a later date should they be found

innocent. This amendment quite obviously goes too far and would

trample on someone's personal property rights. Animals with known

owners which have been seized should not be destroyed at the whim of

a shelter or humane society.

I hope you will give consideration to these points when you are

considering this bill. It's my belief that this bill began with good

intentions and has now been side-tracked. I don't think the

consequences to animal shelters in terms of costs and space

requirements have ever been thought all the way through.

Sincerely,

Carlotta Cooper

Sportsmen's and Animal Owners' Voting Alliance — Tennessee

Tennessee Pet-Law

Tennessee TAX on Pet Vaccinations

Here is the latest information on SB 3850/HB 3834 in the Tennessee legislature. This bill has taken on a life of its own. Right now we don't know how much the state of Tennessee could end up tacking on to the cost of a rabies vaccination. The bill is still in committee so it hasn't passed yet.

From a friend with some inside information:

This started as a bill to increase from three days to five days, the amount of time an owner has to legally claim a dog or cat that is not wearing a vaccination tag or other identification, before the dog or cat may be adopted or destroyed.

The original bill has an unfavorable fiscal note (and little to no chance of passage), but an amendment has been filed that substitutes and replaces the original bill. This amendment has morphed the bill into something completely different.

If the bill passes, they will be raising the cost of rabies certificates in order to fund the state's rabies licensing program through fees rather than using money from the state's general fund. According to the revised fiscal note, this plan is already reflected in the Governor’s FY10-11 Recommended Budget, and the added fee will amount to $1 per registration.

According to an outside source, there is some pressure to add a further 25 to 50 cents onto the fee to pay for spay neuter programs.

The TVMA is OPPOSED to the bill (as amended), but momentum appears to be on the side of the amended bill passing. Why wouldn't it pass: it is projected to increase state revenue by $1 million and decrease state expenditures (from the general fund) by $1 million.

permission to forward