Walt,
a lifetime student of history and constitutional rights, was appalled
that such a law was even being proposed. We had no experience
in legislative matters of any kind, but knew something had to
be done. A couple of dog rescuers had expressed concern, but there
was no organized effort to fight this thing. Some rescuers even
supported it, stating that "If you don't have anything to
hide, why be concerned?" Apparently the Bill of Rights wasn't
that important to them.
We
needed a way to get rescuers together to talk, so we set up an
email list at Yahoo called VA-Rescue-Law. We weren't the only
people upset about this bill once word got out about it. The list
grew quickly and we discovered an impressive number of very smart,
articulate rescuers in the state who were willing to work if someone
would tell them what to do. No one else seemed willing to lead
the charge, so we began to study, research, and talk to people.
The animal rights movement loomed over us early in the journey.
Slowly
it became obvious that SB260 was just the next step in a long,
loosely organized series of efforts by animal rights activists
to make it more difficult to own pets. Disguised as "helping
the animals," these laws would punish good pet owners, rescuers,
and breeders, while having little or no effect on those who were
mistreating animals. For more on the animal rights movement, visit
the National
Animal Interest Alliance (NAIA) site. If this is your first
visit, plan to spend some time.
SB260
had already been passed by the General Assembly and our only hope
was to convince the governor to veto it. We were unsuccessful
in that effort but through a massive grassroots letter-writing
campaign, we did persuade the government to delay enforcement
for six months while we worked on amendments. The Virginia Pet
Law list was made up of regular citizens who had no special contacts,
connections, or insider knowledge, but we had convinced the powers
that something would have to be done about the provisions
in that law.
We
set up a website to share all the information we were gathering.
No-SB-260 grew over the next
few months to more than 70 pages. (The site is no longer up, but
you can see the home page by clicking on the link) Along the way
to the amendment of SB260, we learned a lot about why laws are
passed, how they originate, and why they often don't address the
problems they claim to want to fix. We learned how to write and
call legislators and newspapers. On the website, we shared all
this and stressed the need for politeness and respect when contacting
legislators. However, every citizen has the right and duty
to contact his or her legislators about issues of concern.
After all was said and done, most of the bad features of SB260
had indeed been removed. As with all compromises, there were parts
we didn't like and parts that were fine.
In
these efforts, everyone contributes. Walt and I started the movement,
maintained and moderated the list, attended meetings, organized
letter-writing, wrote all the material for and developed the website,
encouraged and rallied the troops, put together the group's "wish
list" for an amendment, mediated disagreements among group
members, and spent hours on the phone. We met with our own representatives
and several other key members of the General Assembly. We wrote
countless letters to the editor, op-ed pieces and private explanations
for people. Walt made presentations to two other dog groups and
we traveled to several rescue functions to hand out literature,
meet other rescuers and talk with the public.
Other
group members wrote letters to the editor and op ed pieces, obtained
press coverage, wrote and met with their representatives, attended
the VFHS and other meetings, ran off flyers and handed them out,
talked to kennel clubs and community groups, made invaluable telephone
contacts with government officials and legislators and attended
the committee hearings in Richmond. The fight to amend this bad
law could not have been accomplished by any one or two of us working
alone.
SB260
was a long road. We made mistakes along the way and learned much
about not only legislation and politics, but about people in general.
One of the important lessons we learned is that people contribute
what they can. For some, that means writing one letter. For others,
it means spending an hour a day or more on the issue. Some can
go to the state capitol, some can make presentations at meetings.
But no one can do all of it.
Currently...
Throughout
all this, we still weren't very clued in to the trouble that was
brewing on a national level. Then we began to hear rumblings of
anti-owner legislation from various parts of the country, an amazing
number of bad bills being proposed from one coast to the other.
In 2003 we changed the name of VA-Rescue-Law to Pet-Law and invited
breeders and other pet owners to join us in the fight against
animal rights-inspired legislation.
In
Virginia, we were delighted to see the Virginia
Federation of Dog Clubs and Breeders take on the leadership
for fighting animal rights legislation. We continue to encourage
people to write letters -- and they do -- and we keep an open
state list VA-Pet-Law
to inform people of the issues. Several very bad bills are stricken
every year by their patrons and others sre defected in committee.
All in all, Virginia has been a major success for animal owners.
Our only significant failure has been the 2006
passage of HB339, which requires veterinarians to report to county
treasury offices whenever a client gets a rabies shot for a dog.
The idea is that the county will follow up with enforcement of
licensing. The reality is that this is an animal rights law which
will be used to enforce pet limits (unnecessary if cruelty, neglect,
and nuisance laws are enforced) and other restrictive pet laws
and ordinances. The even worse reality is that fewer people will
get rabies shots for their dogs because they 1) are over the pet
limit or 2) do not want to be included in a county database with
information about the breed(s) of dogs they own and the spay/neuter
status of pets. Any law that lowers rabies vaccination compliance
is stupid.
On
the national level, Pet Animal Welfare Statute of 2005 took us
all by surprise; and right at the time we were ending the Virginia
battles that year, we found ourselves on the PAWS issue, actually
opposing the AKC.
The
animal rights movement is way ahead of those of us who want to
protect our rights to own and breed pets, and they co-opt new
organizations every year. We're still learning...but the one thing
we know for sure is that it takes cooperation, tolerance, and
understanding. Some people simply can't work with others, and
it's important to recognize those people early before their negativity
and personal problems begin to take a toll on the others.
But if the rest of us don't overcome our differences enough to
work together, we will not prevail. And if we lose, in 20 years
there will be no dog shows, no legal breeding, and we will be
well on the way to fulfilling the No Animal Use (and that means
no pets) agenda of the animal rights movement.
