>Subject: Fwd: Fw: HB 597 - Recommendation to Vote NO - Delaware's Experience

>
>A rep from the DE dept of ag is urging a No vote in FL, calling the DE law a
>"nightmare."
>
>
>From: Lisa Tanielian [mailto:lisa@
>Sent

v;

>Cc: Adam.Putnam@freshfromflorida.com
@freshfromflorida.com
>Subject: HB 597 - Recommendation to Vote NO - Delaware's Experience
>Dear Committee Members, Although I am not a constituent of your state, I

Print

>have had the unpleasant experience of dealing with Delaware's version of

>similar legislation in Delaware in my position with the Delaware Department
>of Agriculture. http://delcode.delaware.gov/title3/c080/index.shtml . I
>am writing to you about my personal experience, not as a representative of
>the department, nor as a representative of the state. In Delaware, the law
>was passed without a fiscal note, and no personnel were budgeted for the
>complaints that would ensue. Our legislators did not take into account that
>not only would a small Animal Health department have to deal with the
>complaints under the legislation, but would also end up fielding complaints
>regarding many custody related cases that animal control agencies deal with
>on a regular basis. My personal experience dealing with just one complaint
>under our similar statute was a nightmare. It was extremely time consuming,
>there were several hundred emails involved, a visit to the shelter, and at
>least 100 hours spent on just this one case due to many inconsistencies in
>stories. This investigation took place on top of my current job as Spay
>Neuter Coordinator that I already contribute a great deal of voluntary time
>to keep up with, and created a backlog of work as a result. The case is
>highlighted on http://nokilldelaware.org/ . The investigation report that I
>completed was posted by the complainant is at this link
> http://nokilldelaware.org/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderfiles/ag_report.pdf
>, and I have also attached their posted report for your reference. There is
>only one minor change that complainant made to the report that I am aware
>of. As a result of this investigation, I and the Department of
>Agriculture are now being investigated by the Delaware Attorney General. I
>have been interrogated and the State Veterinarian has been interrogated as a
>result. I've spent another 25 hours in time printing copying and organizing
>the investigation data for the Attorney General, and most of another day
>spent traveling to and taking part in the interrogation. This is the
>future for whatever agency is tasked with enforcing HB597 in your state if
>you pass this legislation. This is another site (
> http://delawarecapa.blogspot.com/) that will provide you with some
>information regarding the Delaware experience with similar legislation, and
>shows how costly this legislation will be, and the resources that take away
>from animal welfare life saving duties. Shelter workers and volunteers will
>be tied up with regulatory hoops to jump thru, and pulled away from tasks
>related to caring for the animals and providing adoption opportunities.
>Ultimately this legislation will not save millions of dollars as it has been
>portrayed, and in my opinion will cost animals their lives.
> I hope this information gives you an idea of what you will face in a state
>with a population 21 times that of Delaware's. I have provided pictures at
>the bottom that the complainant posted on the No-Kill Delaware website, so
>you understand the condition of one dog that a shelter was forced to release
>to a rescue against their own judgment. The 1st picture is that of the dog
>at the time he was released to the rescue, and the other shows the emaciated
>condition 40 days later. The report attached also shows other issues that

Print

>the shelter faced as the result of other animals that were released to this
>rescue. Yes, this dog may have been euthanized had he not gone to the
>rescue, but ask yourself if the last 40 days of his life was really more
>humane? So I respectfully ask that you vote NO on HB 597 and encourage
>your senate to also vote NO on SB 818, not only for the welfare of animals
>in your state, but also to protect your state from the financial and public
>perception costs that will occur as a result if either bill is passed.
>Obviously it would not be appropriate for me to provide any additional
>information on this case than what the complainant himself released, but
>feel free to contact me if you would like general information about my
>personal experience al
wt
ilar legislation. Thank y
r
>time. Lisa Tanielian
Camden, DE 19934302
(H)

6 of 6

5/23/15 10:21 AM