Some of you may be surprised to find out there's such a specialty as animal law. It's a quickly growing area of rapidly changing law - as people consider their pets more as family members than, well, pets. The law traditionally treats animals as property - that's how the law evolved, prior to the extensive ownership of domestic animals as house pets. People had cattle and livestock and maybe a sheep herding dog or some barn cats. They were property, commodities to be bought and sold (as livestock still is).
Property is, I believe, still the best way to treat animals under the law no matter how personally involved they are in our lives. It sounds callous, but it's realistic. I have a reasonble expectation that my four year old child will someday have the capability to go to the bank, to earn money, to purchase groceries, to prepare their own food. I don't have that expectation of my cats. They will never have that level of independent sustainability. That's why most states won't allow you to leave money or property to your animals - they can't enjoy them. Don't just leave your property to your animals in your will - consult an attorney to instead set up a trust to care for your animals, working with someone who has agreed to use your estate to care for your animals in the manner you proscribe. A local attorney can tell you more about the particular laws, and they do vary state by state. (Transferring breeding rights is a more complex topic I'll get into later, and it can be covered by legal forms that are available through the author of this blog.)
Another thing folks don't realize is the vast chasm that's developed between those interested in animal welfare, versus those interested in animal rights. The animal "rights" contingent doesn't want animals treated like property - they want them treated like people, with all the same rights. They often ignore the irreconcilability of their own positions, such as how we should all eat vegan when the majority of the animal world is carnivorous or omnivorous. They advocate mandatory spay and neuter of all pets, when their real agenda is for none of us to be allowed to own pets and instead feel all animals should live wild and free in their natural state. Animal rights folks, you usually find just trying to change the law by raising money. Folks who are interested in animal welfare are the ones actually helping animals, working at the shelters, fostering, rescuing, giving money and time and effort.
For example, the Humane Society of the United States. If you live near your local County Humane Society - despite the name - they have not one iota in common. The HSUS does NOT help them, and is not associated with them. The HSUS is a huge political machine. Check their IRS filings, which are required to be public because of their tax exempt status. Of billions in assets, they gave a measly $6.6 million to shelters last year. It can cost half a million dollars to run ONE large scale shelter. So who did they really help? Well, here's a hint - three times that much was spent on legislative efforts, and even more than that spent on "strategic communication" - that's lobbying, to you non-Beltway folk. That means SIX TIMES the amount that actually helped animals, went to making up new laws. Is that really where you wanted your Hurricane Katrina donation to go?
Groups like PeTA have an even worse track record. PeTA maintains a shelter in their Virginia headquarters - with a more than 80% euthanasia rate. Two PeTA workers were tried last year for picking up adoptable animals from North Carolina vets and shelters, putting them down in the back of a van and throwing them away in a dumpster. Two more PeTA employees are currently being investigated for stealing a hunting dog, taking off its tracking collar and trying to dispose of it. They'll send you lots of pretty mailings with animals in horrible situations - but even less of their budget goes to actually helping one single animal. THAT is animal rights, not animal welfare.
So what is all this lobbying about? Well, a lot of it is about animals having the same rights as you and I. It's meant to force us all to stop eating meat and dairy; it's meant to prevent us from choosing a particular pet based on our families' needs. If you live with an elderly and fragile parent, or with small children, can you imagine having no choice in the pet you want? You don't get to select a small dog with a calm temperament, or a cat that's not too active and won't trip someone - you get what your local pound has, which they usually will tell you, they can't predict temperament. I'm all for shelter adoption - if you don't have any particular needs to be met. But I'm also for free enterprise and choice - so to me, if you want a Borzoi or a mutt, a Turkish Angora or a domestic shorthair cat, you should be able to go out and get it. Animal rights folks don't think you should have that choice.
They also think we need to pass laws calling us "guardians" and not "owners" because the word guardian will take on a new meaning under the law, and subject owners to higher responsibilities. The fact is we already have sufficient animal cruelty laws on the books in every single state. They need to be enforced, is the problem. And if we don't have the money or ability to enforce them now, how will passing more stringent, invasive and expensive laws be more helpful to anyone?
Over the next few days I'll tackle topics like breeder registration, pet limit laws, breed specific legislation, and how you can help. You can also get updates, sample letters, and find out what communities need your support by subscribing to our partner yahoo mailing list, by sending an email to animalpetlaw-subscribe@yahoogroups.com. The more you learn, the more you'll want to help.
No comments:
Post a Comment