West Sections:   Home | Sports | Opinion

Wednesday, February 23, 2011

Bills Would Attend to Weaknesses in Animal Cruelty Laws

By D'Val Westphal
Of the Journal
          With the 2011 legislative session half over, more than one New Mexico lawmaker has said it's not a good time to be in the Roundhouse because there is no money.
        That sentiment is absolutely understandable. But sometimes it doesn't take money to do the right thing.
        It just takes political will.
        Companion bills SB 348, sponsored by Sen. Richard Martinez, and HB 319, by Rep. Al Park, would help New Mexico do the right thing by cleaning up and clarifying wording in the current animal cruelty statute, 30-18-1, so prosecutors could charge and convict clear-cut cases of intentional animal cruelty. Both were moving through committees Tuesday evening.
        Think the changes are unnecessary? That animal cruelty doesn't happen in your part of the state?
        Think again.
        Since 2000:
        • In Doña Ana County a dog was found being eaten alive by maggots.
        • In Las Cruces five snakes were killed and 15 released from a reptile rescue group.
        • In San Juan County a dog was found with its collar embedded in its neck.
        • In Grant County a dog was abandoned after being shot with pellet gun, her leg wrapped so tightly in wire it required amputation.
        • In Colfax County 104 cattle were found dead of starvation; 125 were starving.
        • In northern New Mexico a horse was starved, beaten, neglected and left with a gangrenous leg and too-long hooves that forced it to walk on its fetlocks.
        • In Albuquerque a dog was stolen from an Albuquerque shelter and raped.
        • In counties ranging from Bernalillo to Cibola to Sandoval to San Miguel, dogs' ears were hacked of with scissors.
        • In Torrance County five horses were found dead.
        • In Luna County 23 horses were found neglected/starved.
        • In Curry County 29 cats and dogs were found dead.
        And despite the clear great bodily harm and/or death inflicted — harm and/or death that often took not days or weeks but played out over months — in most cases nobody was charged with animal cruelty. In no case was someone charged with felony animal cruelty. Usually because the statute is so ambiguous prosecutors weren't clear that a written law had been broken.
        And hey, it's just a dog, right? Just a snake, just a cow or a horse, just a cat. If you buy that, try Googling animal cruelty and serial killer.
        Elisabeth Jennings, executive director of Animal Protection of New Mexico Inc., points out "the link between cruelty to animals and violence to humans is well established.
        Our communities are safer and better places to live when our laws support keeping animals safe from harm. These amendments will further protect animals from abuse and will allow for more effective intervention against those whose harmful, criminal behavior often begins with animal cruelty."
        Critics have said the amendments go too far — that you won't be able to eradicate a rodent infestation in your home, kill a snake in your yard, go fishing and hunting, defend yourself against an animal attack, leave your livestock in a field, put your aged pet down.
        But responsible pet and livestock owners, sportsmen and veterinarians have been protected with very specific, 12-year-old language in the statute that enumerates those practices and allows "commonly accepted activities not otherwise prohibited by law."
        The changes simply spell out that captive reptiles are included under the statute. That sustenance means food, water and shelter. That reckless means being wholly indifferent to the safety of the animal (a very high standard to meet — Jennings says accidents don't qualify). That recklessly mistreating/abandoning/failing to provide necessary sustenance to an animal that results in great bodily harm or death or engaging in bestiality are fourth-degree felonies.
        The changes are not just about punishing — they also address the underlying problem.
        The amendment spells out that courts can (and for felonies must) order "participat(ion) in an animal cruelty prevention program or an animal cruelty education program" or "psychological counseling for treatment of a mental health disorder" and "the offender shall bear the expense."
        To help set up that treatment segment, Jennings says APNM and the New Mexico Department of Public Safety are organizing training this year — with the first round in Albuquerque in April — "to train therapists in what is called AniCare therapy, specifically to treat people who are animal abusers. This will help make sure there are people to provide the psychological counseling we are asking be mandated for those convicted of extreme cruelty."
        As for concerns the tougher penalties would clog the legal system and run up law enforcement and court costs, a Legislative Finance Committee fiscal impact analysis says "there will be a minimal administrative cost for statewide update, distribution and documentation of statutory changes.
        Any additional fiscal impact on the judiciary will be proportional to the enforcement of this law and commenced prosecutions."
        Jennings says based on the best available information, having this amended language in place would have resulted in an average of just five prosecutions a year since 2000.
        Yet those are five very important prosecutions — ones that add up to show what kind of state New Mexico is, what kind of people New Mexicans are, what kind of behavior is acceptable here.
        And what kind of behavior is not.
        road@abqjournal.com