Posted on 03/15/2006 5:53:19 AM PST by Calpernia
It could soon be against the law in New Jersey to tie the family pet up in the yard for long periods of time. Thats the aim of bills recently introduced by Tenth District lawmakers Senator Andy Ciesla and Assemblymen Dave Wolfe and Jim Holzapfel.
Senate bill S1705 and Assembly bill A2773 would update New Jersey's animal cruelty statutes making it a disorderly persons offense to inflict unnecessary cruelty upon a living animal by chaining or otherwise restraining the animal so as to deprive it of the ability to properly eat, drink shelter itself, move sufficiently to maintain its mobility and good health or avoid serious injury to itself.
Assemblyman Jim Holzapfel says the genesis of this bill was prompted by Hurricane Katrina. He says there are heart wrenching accounts of the plight of pets who were restrained and unable to fend for themselves during and after the storm.
Holzapfel says another factor that prompted the measure, was a report in the American Journal of Veterinary Medicine indicating that 20-percent of the dogs involved in fatal attacks on humans in the last 15 to 20 years were animals that were restrained by their owners at the time of the attack.
Under the measure a person found guilty of this offense would face a fine ranging from $250 to $1,000 dollars or be imprisoned for a term of up to six months, or both, at the discretion of the court. The bill also provides for an additional civil penalty of $250 to $1,000 dollars.
Holzapfel says, "Our hope is that fines and possible jail time will serve as an effective deterrent to prevent this type of animal abuse."
Guard dogs on commercial properties would be outlawed, towns could not legally stop people from feeding feral cats and a medical diagnosis would be required to euthanize an animal.
Police would be trained to perform CPR on injured cats and dogs, and they would be the front line in animal abuse probes. Special teams of county prosecutors also would be created to handle the cases, much like they already do for child abuse, sex offenses and major crimes.
These are just a few reforms being proposed by leaders of Gov. James E. McGreevey's Animal Welfare Task Force, a group charged with overhauling the way New Jersey handles animal welfare issues.
The nearly 200 pages of draft recommendations, obtained by The Star-Ledger, are still under review by the full 30-member task force, and with McGreevey due to leave office Nov. 15, it is unclear whether any action will be taken on the task force recommendations.
Still, the proposals already are causing a stir within the task force itself and among animal control officers and town officials who would be charged with taking more responsibility for animal welfare.
"We're supposed to do this while solving crimes and handling homeland security? I'm concerned. I'm already 20 officers down from what I should be," said Dover Township Police Chief Michael Mastronardy, who just ended his term as president of the New Jersey Association of Police Chiefs.
"We would never be able to provide the (animal) services to the degree that these people would expect," he added.
McGreevey appointed the task force in February 2003 to recommend improved ways to monitor shelters, investigate animal cruelty and deal with euthanizing strays. Currently, animal control and shelters are handled by a fragmented network of private and public agencies with little state oversight from the Department of Health and Senior Services.
The governor's office yesterday would not comment on the proposals.
"It's in draft form, not in final form," said Micah Rasmussen, a McGreevey spokesman. "We want to wait until the task force does something with it or we have it."
Judith Leiberman, task force chairwoman and a counselor to the governor, did not return telephone calls to her office.
As it stands, the report suggests sweeping changes in how towns, pet owners and animal shelter operations deal with animals.
For example, every town would be forced to hire a trained abuse investigator as well as require its police to be newly trained in all aspects of animal abuse prosecution and detection as they assume the job of responding to animal abuse calls. The SPCA, created more than 100 years ago to investigate animal abuse, would essentially be sidelined and county sheriffs would be required to become central record-keepers on abuse cases.
Overall, the report recommends creating a new animal protection system, funded in part by increased license fees, primarily to care for the more than 120,000 stray animals picked up annually from New Jersey streets.
While traditional spay and neuter programs would be increased, towns would be stopped from rounding up feral cat colonies or preventing people from keeping large groups of animals. Overcrowded shelters would not be able to euthanize unwanted animals except for medical reasons, and the report recommends building more shelters through government and private cooperation.
(snip)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/1562040/posts
NJSBA Animal Law Committee
(snip)
HOW TO PROSECUTE OR DEFEND ANIMAL RELATED ISSUES INCLUDING…
• Advising animal activists - what you can and cannot do
• Criminal defense of animals and animal activists,
including a discussion of the New Jersey bear hunt
case, egg farm case, and more
• Patriot Act and First Amendment issues
- How liberties of animal welfare groups and animal
advocates have been narrowed by the Patriot Act
- How animal activism is treated under the Patriot Act
• Non-profit and tax exempt status for animal welfare
groups
…and more
(snip)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/1562040/posts?page=1#1
NEW JERSEY STATUTES TITLE 4. AGRICULTURE AND DOMESTIC ANIMALS CHAPTER 22. PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS ARTICLE 1. SOCIETIES FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY A. THE NEW JERSEY SOCIETY
22-3. General powers The society may:
a. Elect its own members and officers;
b. Elect or designate officers and agents for carrying on its business;
c. Establish such by-laws or regulations as may be deemed necessary for its government;
d. Enforce all laws or ordinances enacted for the protection of dumb animals;
e. Make, alter and use a common seal;
f. Adopt a common badge which shall be authority for making arrests;
g. Sue and be sued in all courts; and all actions brought by or against the society shall be in its corporate name;
h. Purchase and hold such real estate as may be expedient for the administration of its service, and take by devise or gift all real estate or personal property which is devised or given to it, without regard to value. The title to such real estate shall be taken in the corporate name of the society.
http://www.state.nj.us/sci/pdf/spca.pdf
State of NJ State Commission of Investigation of the SPCA
Excerpt from that PDF:
The SPCAs are accountable to no governmental authority. Because there are no standards, rules or guidelines governing their composition, operation, training or activities, there is no consistancy or uniformity in their make-up, functioning or enforcement of the laws. These autonomous organizations present a true hodgepodge of extreme diversity and a danger to the state's structured system of law enforcement. Once individuals in a county receive a charter from the state SPCA, they control the selection, discipline and removal of their members, officers and agents; the election of terms of office of members of the board of directors; the content of any by-laws; the formulation of any rules or regulations; what training, if any will be provided; how they will enforce the animal cruelty laws, and how they will spend the income. As a result, the SPCAs run the gamut in effectiveness of operation, scrupulousness in financial matters and enforcement of the cruelty laws. While some are operated in a highly professional manner, according to set rules and regulations, others are run as the personal domain of a well entrenched few who discard the rules on whim. Many individuals involved in these societies are dedicated to the welfare of animals and committed to functioning within an organized, structed environment, while others are 'wannabe cops' or motivated by personal gain. Because the SPCAs operate outside the realm of government, they have become havens for those who cannot obtain legitimate law enforcement positions.
(snip)
The movement [SPCA] had its roots in the efforts of Henry Bergh, a European aristocrat who, following his appointment in 1863 to a diplomatic post at the Russian Court of Czar Alexander II, championed the cause of animals against inhumane treatment. Bergh soon immigrated to America, but only after stopping in London to confer with the president of England's Royal Society. In February 1866, Bergh delivered an impassioned speech at New York City's Clinton Hall before an audience that included influencial government and business leaders.
In recounting the horrific practices in America of the inhumane treatment of animals, he emphasized that the protection of animals had neither class lines nor political boundaries. Bergh's speech was covered extensively by the press. Recognizing that anti-cruelty statutes were meaningless in the absence of enforcement, Bergh's approach was two pronged. His efforts culminated in the New York Legislature's passage of a charter incorporating the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals on april 10, 1866, and nine days later, of an anti-cruelty law that vested the society with the authority to enforce it. Bergh, whose successes were due largely to his political and social connections, was elected as the society's first president.
(snip)
The Honorable Reginald Stanton, J.S.C., recognized, but refrained from ruling on, the issue of the constitutionality of the statutory scheme. His comments are compelling:
"The powers granted under the various statutes [regarding the enforcement of the animal cruelty laws, adoption of a common badge, making of arrests and carrying of weapons] are significant law enforcement powers. It is important to note that all of the members of the state society and the county societies are self-selected. They are simply private persons who are interested in protecting animals. They are not selected by the public. They are not subject to managerial control by any public. They are not subject to managerial control by any public officials. They are not subject to any publicly imposed training standards or discipline.
At an early stage in this litigation, it occurred to me that the broad grant of powers to the state society and to the county societies might involve an unconstitutional delegation of governmental powers to the private persons...
...Although I have serious misgivings about the wisdom of granting extensive law enforcement powers to private persons, there is, of course, a vital difference between what I might view as an unwise legislative policy and an unconstituional policy. Furthermore, the record in this action is particularly ill-suited for making a sound adjudication on the issue of possible unconstitutionality of the statutory scheme. I have decided to refrain from any ruling on constitutional issues in this case."
(snip)
ARREST POWERS: The legislative provision governing arrests for violations of the animal cruelty laws is contained in N.J.S.A. 4:22-44. It empowers only the state society and not the county societies. Arrests may be made with a warrant or without a warrant when the violation occurs in the individual's presence. Since the provision was first enacted in 1880, the power to arrest has been conferred not only upon the NJ SPCA's officers and agents, but also upon its members. However, nowhere in the statutes governing the societies is the term 'member' defined. Therefore, it includes dues-paying members and those members of the Board of Directors who are not agents or officers. These individuals receive no law enforcement training.
(snip)
POWER TO CARRY WEAPONS: Perhaps the most disturbing area of unbridled authority bestowed upon SPCAs is the ability of their officers to carry firearms without being subject to governmental oversight or to most of the stringent requirements governing legitimate law enforcement officers. While some SPCAs do not allow their officers to carry weapons or do not use the designation 'officer' in order to eliminate the firearms issue, the officers of nine SPCAs are armed. Both county and state SPCA officers are exempt under NJSA 2C: 39-6c(7), which empowers SPCA officers to carry weapons in the actual performance of their official duties.
Good to hear that NJ has reached near-Utopian status and this is all the gov has left to do..../s
Dog-In-Distress Ping.
Un-fricking-believeable, even for a socialist-commie utopia like Joisey.
McGreevey is no longer governor. He had to step down. But, never fear, Codey stepped up and signed the Animal Task Force legislature into law.
Now we dwell in the socialist state of Corzine.
"Un-fricking-believeable, even for a socialist-commie utopia like Joisey."
whats the matter with you?
don't you know dogs have the same rights a people?
won't you help pass the bill that allows them to vote?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1594086/posts
New FBI Smoking Guns Point To PETA
What about the gerbils???
Gerbils can now vote.
Just and FYI on our current gov status:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/1596684/posts?page=5#5
..but in NJ they MUST vote Demoncratic!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.