VOTE NO TO Virginia HB 1570

From
Ravi Iyer, MD, PhD

To
Delegate Robert Hull & Members of the Commonwealth of Virginia House &
Senate Committees on
Agriculture
Chesapeake
Natural Resources

Dear Virginia Delegates

I am calling your attention to Virginia House Bill 1570 offered for
consideration by the House by Delegate Robert Hull.

I categorically do not support this poorly thought out bill in its entirety!!!

This bill attempts to implement a policy that would have the same
effect as a mandatory spay/neuter policy without calling it as such.
Mandatory spay/neuter laws for dogs and cats have been imposed in
numerous jurisdictions across America. Despite claims to the contrary,
these laws have always been failures. There is no example of a
mandatory spay/neuter law that has reduced shelter intake or
euthanasia rates, though proponents try to spin the numbers and claim
otherwise. These laws have instead dramatically increased costs to
cash-strapped governments, with no public benefit.

Santa Cruz County, CA saw its animal control costs double since its
mandatory spay/neuter law went into effect.
San Mateo County, CA had the nation's first mandatory spay/neuter law.
It is as a "disappointment" by its biggest backer, the Peninsula
Humane Society. The PHS learned from experience that mandatory
spay/neuter laws don't work, so they no longer support a law that
would impose it statewide in California.
Los Angeles saw their animal control costs increase by 269% after they
passed a spay/neuter mandate. They still kill tens of thousands of
dogs and cats each year.
The purported rationale behind this bill appears to be to reduce the
burden on animal shelters. It attempts to do this by including
"dealers" under the umbrella of the current laws governing animal
shelters and other releasing agencies. The exemptions crafted in this
bill would criminalize large numbers of honest and ethical individuals
who are responsible owners of intact animals without in anyway
addressing the unethical individuals. It would also impose a huge
taxpayer burden to implement the provisions of this bill.

In HB 1570, it's not the owner of a dog or cat would have to satisfy
an exemption, but rather the breeder of this dog or cat who has to
provide the documented proof. The bill's exemptions are all based not
on what kind of dog or cat owner the individual may be, but rather
what kind of breeder the dog or cat came from. If the breeder doesn't
provide this intrusive and unprecedented proof that they are one of
the breeders that HB 1570 exempts, or doesn't do it to the
satisfaction of your local Animal Control authorities, the individual
will be required to spay/neuter their dog or cat.

HB 1570 provides for exemptions for dogs and cats that were bred by a
"hobby breeder", "breed improver", or "fancier breeder" that fall
apart on closer inspection.

A "hobby breeder" can only breed one litter. After that, the exclusion
wouldn't apply. Serious and responsible hobby breeding involves more
than a one time litter. in the lifetime of that pursuit.

A "fancier breeder" has to be able to prove they show in certain
sanctioned dog or cat shows on a regular basis. What's "regular"? The
definition is ambiguous and arbitrary.

A "breed improver" breeder has to be able to prove they don't derive
"income" from breeding. Why does improvement of your product require
you to be a non-profit? Does Ford or GM require to have no income for
them to prove that they are engaged in product quality improvement?

This bill would have serious unintended consequences on countless
breeders who conform to ethical breeding practices without in anyway
addressing the problem. The only agenda that this bill addresses is
that of the anti-pet lobby.

Rather than impose a strategy such as mandatory spay/neuter that has
failed everywhere it has been attempted, the Commonwealth of Virgina
should leverage the success that Charlotteville, VA has had in its
animal shelters. This is the No Kill Equation as advanced by the No
Kill Advocacy Center. Charlottesville, VA is saving 92% of the dogs
and cats admitted to its open admissions shelter, making it a leader
in a nation that routinely kills 50% of dogs and cats admitted. This
success can only be accomplished when animal lovers within a community
work cooperatively to save lives.

I do not support that my elected representatives embark in legislative
actions that criminalizes me by default or require that I bear the
burden of proof of my ethicality so that those elements of my society
who pursue unethical behavior may be restrained.

This bill cannot be fixed by amendments since the fundamental premises
upon which it is based are flawed.

I fully expect that you will carefully reconsider the patently
one-sided arguments that resulted in the promotion of this bill and
see fit to revoke this bill at the first opportunity OR vote against
its passage forwith.
Sincerely
Ravi R. Iyer, MD, PhD