Patrick J Battuello

Archive for the ‘Animal Cruelty Law’ Category

Blood on Their Hands

In Animal Cruelty Law, Dogfighting on February 8, 2012 at 1:00 pm

Last September, the NYS Legislature finally saw fit to make attending an animal fight a misdemeanor (prior to this, it was a zero-penalty violation). Alas, though, it is but a Class B, three month infraction (just one year if second offense). However, if sufficient evidence exists that cash changed hands (gambling, primarily), the penalty can increase to one year. Why this discrepancy? Should it make any difference if one comes merely for the entertainment? What kind of a person enjoys watching brutally-trained dogs forced to destroy each other? What kind of a person applauds the victor hovering over his battered, blood-soaked, and sometimes lifeless rival? What kind of a person revels in the public execution of the loser at the hands of his owner (remember, Michael Vick confessed to personally killing – hanging, drowning, electrocuting – his underperformers)?

There is, still, a larger, more significant discrepancy between how the law treats spectators and the fighters themselves. The people responsible for staging animal fights are subject to a felony charge carrying a four year prison sentence. On this, New York is to be commended. But some basic logic is in order. Dogfighting exists either as a business for profit or as a street-level matter of reputations. The more professional operations are entirely sustained by admission and wagering. In other words, by the spectator. In the cruder neighborhood form, dogs act as expendable surrogates for men pursuing upward social mobility. Often gang-related, this back-alley savagery would lack any meaning without bystanders to attest. Clearly, the fans, betting or not, fuel the evil, and the industry implodes in their absence.

Senator John DeFrancisco, a sponsor of New York’s recent amendment, acknowledged the simple truth when he said (The Post-Standard, 8/4/11), “Without spectators, the events would not happen.” Then why three months? The HSUS currently ranks our state 48th in anti-dogfighting legislation; 28 other states have already made spectating a felony. New York has much work to do.

Dogfighting is sadism defined, a generally-accepted societal wrong that could be eliminated in our lifetime. But why do we insist on waging this battle with one hand tied? On this, I confess bemusement. Is there a politically important lobby that must be appeased? If not, but rather an indisposition to further clog courts and cells, then I ask: What is our justice system for if not to protect the most vulnerable among us from wanton cruelty? The miscreants mired in this cesspool, be they owners, trainers, fighters, or onlookers, are not otherwise kind, upstanding citizens simply allowing dogs to be dogs. Each, in fact, is a sadist, perhaps the worst thing we can say about a fellow human being, and should be punished accordingly. The pit (bullring) is the modern day Colosseum, bloodlust and all.

Burning Up

In Animal Cruelty Law, Dogs, Factory Farming, Turkeys on August 2, 2011 at 12:34 pm

In late June, English police-dog trainer Sgt. Ian Craven attempted suicide after learning that his charges, two Belgian Shepherds, had died after he left them in a sweltering car for nearly six hours. Worse, this is not the first time a dog has baked to death under his care. Also in June, a 19-year-old California woman left her young Golden Retriever to die in a mall parking lot while she shopped…for three hours. In May, a Florida woman did the same while visiting her mother on a college campus. After being alerted by security, she returned to her car to find the dog (Florida Times-Union, 5/22/11) “panting and unable to stand.” That dog, too, perished.

This past month, a Minnesota woman, who had just completed a vet visit with her two Terriers, stopped at a restaurant for lunch. She emerged 2 1/2 hours later to find the dogs dead. But within that same state, word comes of the heat-related deaths of roughly 105,000 factory-farmed turkeys and 1,500 cattle. No talk here, however, of animal cruelty charges, suicidal guardians, or angry citizens. Just money: “Minnesota Turkey Growers Association Executive Director Steve Olson says the 105,000 turkeys lost equals an economic hit of somewhere between $1.1 and $1.6 million.” This stunning incongruity conveniently ignores that dogs and turkeys suffer in an uncomfortably similar way.

Since a dog cools himself by panting, a hot, tightly-shut car quickly becomes a hellhole, even in milder summer temperatures. The process begins with rapid, frantic breathing (which further deteriorates the confined space) as his internal temperature climbs. He will then become unsteady and stagger, with vomiting and bloody diarrhea common. As desperate panic mounts, cells die, and the kidneys and brain begin to fail. Seizures and/or coma, then death. However, renowned veterinarian Holly Cheever told me that “heat prostration is much the same in most vertebrate species”; in other words, the turkeys and cows endured the same awful, and ultimately fatal, distress as those dogs. A distress, by the way, measured in hours.

So, why is one reported as cruelty and received with sadness, while the other a business misfortune? Simply put, we have long-acquiesced to a gaping hole in our moral reasoning. The pity and outrage we feel regarding the dogs is born of allowing ourselves an emotional attachment to them. Of course, the people responsible for those canine deaths will never be punished satisfactorily; we profess to care about dog suffering, but not enough to do more than merely inconvenience dog killers. On the other hand, the turkeys and cows, as production widgets, elicit virtually no sympathy upon news of their untimely ends. That is irrational, inconsistent, and very sad.

All Hunting (Not Just Canned) Is Unsportsmanlike

In Animal Cruelty Law, Hunting on June 28, 2011 at 12:07 pm

“Canned hunts are cruel and unsportsmanlike. The practice of killing tame, exotic animals within the confines of an enclosure where the animals have no chance of escape is contrary to the principles of fair chase, sportsmanship and common decency. Captive hunts are out of step with common principles governing responsible hunting and should be banned.” (Congressman Steve Cohen)

“Canned hunting is not a real sport. It is abhorrent and cruel, and there is really no hunting involved.” (Congressman Brad Sherman)

The HSUS has recently endorsed a new House bill aimed at curtailing the canned hunting industry (Fred’s Death). The bill, Sportsmanship in Hunting Act of 2011, only applies to the interstate (federal jurisdiction) trade of an “exotic animal” (a mammal “not indigenous to the United States”) “for the purposes of allowing the killing or injuring of that animal for entertainment or for the collection of a trophy.” It would also criminalize (up to five years) computer-assisted remote hunting (shooting animals with your mouse), which is not currently a problem.

There are roughly 1,000 American ranches, or preserves, offering captive exotics (or simple whitetails and pheasants) for sacrifice. Here, you can enjoy the charms of a rustic lodge, home cooking, beautiful scenery (including many of the vanquished), and the exhilaration of the impending track and kill. When successful, and you will be successful, your pride must be preserved for posterity. The process is sad: Securely enclosed (zero chance for escape), the typically docile, tame, and trusting animals are destroyed for racks and photo ops. And what better way to initiate the young and hone nascent skills (third paragraph from the end)? Logic dictates that not everyone gets off a clean kill-shot, especially those who frequent these ranches, so their practice often come at the expense of an animal’s protracted death.

Still, the politicians’ quotes merit a closer look. The American hunting experience is steeped in a tradition of airy rhetoric: honorable sportsmanship, respect for the animal, communion with nature, bonding with forebears, and rite of passage. These “common principles” are so ingrained that arguments to the contrary are viewed as heresy promulgated by the ignorant. But how exactly is hunting a sport (Man vs Mallard)? What, do tell, constitutes a “fair chase”? Are the decidedly benign deer and duck (who would not be protected by this law) worthy adversaries? Sport implies competition (nonlethal, of course) between willing rivals. Someone, then, should inform these creatures that they’re in a game.

Well-meaning as this bill may be (Rep. Cohen, owing to his initiatives on crush videos and horse transport, was honored by the HSUS earlier this year), it is irrational to protect some species from this brand of cruelty, but not others. Also, the “fair chase” argument, along with humane culling and ecological balancing, is specious. It is what hunters tell themselves to justify their pursuit of pleasure. In short, all human hunting of animals is, by definition, unsportsmanlike. It’s high time for hunters to get over themselves.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.