Better than Oreo's Law? ‘Groundbreaking’ shelter access bill introduced

A “groundbreaking” new law proposed this week in New York state could help save public shelter animals who might otherwise be euthanized, plus serve as a model for other states, according to Laura Allen of Animal Law Coalition.

Allen, who helped create A.B. 5449, introduced Tuesday by New York Assemblywoman Amy Paulin, says the bill would require public shelters to give other rescue organizations a chance to take out and assume the care of animals who are slated for euthanasia, provided that several criteria are met.

Although the proposed legislation is similar in intent to the controversial Oreo’s Law, “it’s a much better bill,” says Allen.

For a Q&A with Allen on A.B. 5449, please see below.

Read Allen’s analysis of the bill for Animal Law Coalition.

Q&A WITH LAURA ALLEN, ANIMAL LAW COALITION

Animal Policy Examiner (APE):  Did you help write the bill?

Laura Allen: The bill is sponsored by Assembly Member Amy Paulin. She has worked hard to put this together with the help of a number of people from shelters, rescue organizations, animal welfare organizations, state agencies, and legislative staff. I was involved in that process.

APE: How does this differ from Oreo's law?

Laura Allen: Oreo’s Law mandates that shelters turn over animals to any 501c3 [IRS-registered nonprofit] that requests them but there is no requirement the organization taking the animal meet any minimum care requirements. An inspection is not permitted unless there is “legally sufficient probable cause.”

That means to me the shelter would need a search warrant or at least a legal opinion that there is legally sufficient probable cause. Otherwise it would be illegal to inspect.

And if a judge has issued a warrant, then probably the rescue should be searched by law enforcement, not the shelter, for evidence of a crime and animals seized and charges brought.

We all know it is very difficult to get law enforcement and prosecutors involved in actually investigating let alone prosecuting animal cruelty. Yet, under this version of Oreo’s Law the shelter must still turn over an animal to a rescue for which there is probable cause to believe the animal will be treated cruelly, if the prosecutor doesn’t then proceed with charges! A great provision for hellholes and substandard so-called rescues given that prosecutors rarely charge even with probable cause.

Also, what if it’s not bad enough for a crime, but is still bad?  Shelters would be forced to turn the animals over.  

Under Oreo’s law, 501c3s would still be eligible even if they have directors, employees or regular volunteers that have in the past violated some animal protection laws.

The latest version of Oreo’s law could also be called “pro kill” for dogs with aggression issues. These animals are certainly thrown under the proverbial bus. Instead of recognizing there may be places and programs to help and encouraging placement when possible and safe, under Oreo’s law, shelters would simply euthanize these dogs. 

The Oreo’s law overall is poorly written, lacks many definitions and would leave shelters as well as rescues wondering what to do in certain instances.  The record keeping requirements are onerous and may violate federal privacy laws like HIPPA. 

APE:  Why is there a need for this law?

Laura Allen: I think in New York this largely codifies what is already happening, that animals are being moved out of shelters to available rescues. This law establishes a framework for cooperation that will help make sure all shelters and rescues work together in this way.

Also, there are many states where there is little or no experience of shelters working with rescues or no rules to follow. This fills in a framework they can use to work together. I think that there is a need also because there will be shelters that simply won’t work with rescues or even try to save animals from euthanasia and the message to them is that this is now a priority.  

APE: Would you explain why you believe this law would be groundbreaking?

Laura Allen: Certainly the Delaware law led the way last year and this New York bill builds on shelter access by actually giving rescues some rights to be on a registry of rescues that a shelter director must contact and give a chance to take an animal before euthanizing the animal.

Any reasons for denying the rescue’s application to be on the registry must be in writing and state specifically what the rescue must do to qualify for the registry.

On the other hand, shelters have the right to assure rescues meet standards of care and that their staff and regular volunteers are not felons, have not previously violated any laws protecting animals or had animals seized from them.

The New York bill offers a framework for cooperation between shelters and rescues.   

APE: Are there similar laws in any states?

Laura Allen:  Delaware and also California have laws mandating shelter animals must be turned over to 501c3s that request them if they are going to be euthanized.

The California law was passed as part of Hayden law, an effort to place “adoptable and treatable” animals. As a mandate, Hayden law has not really fostered cooperation between shelters and rescues or assured animals don’t end up in a situation of cruelty or neglect.

Gregory Castle of Best Friends Animal Society observed in 2010 in a Facebook posting: 

“[W]e must see the threshold qualification for rescues addressed …Some may call it a minor point, but we do not. The Hayden Bill in California is often cited as a shining example of shelter access legislation, but it does nothing to address these kinds of situations and they are more prevalent in California than proponents of the bill are either aware of or willing to admit. In the last 2 years alone Best Friends has been asked to intervene in 267 hoarding situations affecting over 19,000 animals. Of those, 49 have been in California, 7 more incidents than the next three states combined.”

In Illinois release to rescues is limited to “unclaimed dogs and cats deemed adoptable by the animal control facility”. 510 ILCS 5/11.

APE: If this passes in NY, do you think other states would follow suit with similar laws? 

Laura Allen: Yes.

APE: Who, if anyone, would you expect to oppose this law?

Laura Allen: I don’t know why anyone would oppose this.

APE: Who are its supporters?

Laura Allen: Shelters and rescues as well as animal welfare advocates and legislators. 

For continued coverage of A.B. 5449 please visit this page again soon.

INTERESTED IN MORE NEWS AND INFO ABOUT ANIMALS? Visit AnimalBeat.org.

And please check out Katerina's San Diego Dogs Examiner page.

Katerina Lorenzatos Makris (a.k.a. Kathryn Makris) has written 18 books for major publishers and hundreds of articles for publications such as National Geographic Traveler, San Francisco Chronicle, Mother Jones, Petside.com, and two regional news wire services.

A cofounder of AnimalBeat.org, she holds a B.A. in Environmental Science Studies and a lifelong interest in animal issues.

Among her books are Your Adopted Dog: Everything You Need to Know about Rescuing and Caring for a Best Friend in Need (The Lyons Press), coauthored with Shelley Frost>and The Eco-Kids, a series of novels for tweens (Avon Books).

Her story "Small Change" placed as a finalist in The Bark magazine's short fiction contest and appeared in the November 2010 issue.

She may be reached at youradopteddog@yahoo.com.