Respect my authorithai

[LadyShea]

On another board a poster described being visited by the "humane society" due to a neighbors report of cruelty. Apparently her dog is skinny and has some trouble walking due to a neurological disorder, and is under the care of a licensed vet. The dog shows no signs of pain or distress.

The lady explained this to the "investigators", who called the vet, yet they are demanding she take the dog back to the vet, within a deadline, and want her to have the dog put down because they explained "he may still be in pain and not show any signs" (no evidence that he is in pain, mind you).

Okay, what's the issue here? The Humane Society is a private charitable organization, not law enforcement....or so I thought. It seems some states (PA was reported as one) have granted authority to these private, tax exempt charities to investigate cruelty claims.

Many Humane Societies are fronts for extremist animal rights groups. They are made up of private citizen members, not trained, licensed, or regulated law enforcement officers. Um, WTF? How can this be legal?

[Naru]

They don't have any actual authority though, do they?

[LadyShea]

Yes, they do, apparently. Some states allow them enforcement authority. I just found the FL statutes that allow it.

FLORIDA CRUELTY TO ANIMALS STATUTES
(1) Any county or any society or association for the prevention of cruelty to children or animals, organized under the laws of this state, may appoint agents for the purpose of investigating violations of any of the provisions of this chapter or any other law of the state for the purpose of protecting children and animals or preventing any act of cruelty thereto.

(2) All appointments of such agents by such societies or corporations must have the approval of the mayor of the city in which the society or association exists, and if the society or association exists or works outside of any city, the appointment must be approved by the county court judge or the judge of the circuit court for the county, and the mayor or judge shall keep a record of such appointment. The approval of the appointment of any agent by a county for either the incorporated or unincorporated areas of such county shall be by the county commission.

This is scary to me. Some mayor can decide to grant authority to private citizens to investigate other citizens...without due process or probable cause?

[Naru]

What I mean is, can they actually do anything other than annoy this poster?

[ChuckF]

Originally Posted by LadyShea

Okay, what's the issue here? The Humane Society is a private charitable organization, not law enforcement....or so I thought. It seems some states (PA was reported as one) have granted authority to these private, tax exempt charities to investigate cruelty claims.

Many Humane Societies are fronts for extremist animal rights groups. They are made up of private citizen members, not trained, licensed, or regulated law enforcement officers. Um, WTF? How can this be legal?

Looking through the states on this page, it looks like individuals are appointed deputies authorized by the relevant agency to investigate allegations of cruelty. From the PA page:

An association for the prevention of cruelty to animals may apply to the court of common pleas for appointment of an individual a policeman (agent) of the association. These officers are given all powers of a police officer for instances of animal cruelty. 22 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 501

- The humane society police officer must complete training in PA cruelty laws and police procedure as well as in animal care and handling. 22 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 3712

- The humane society police officer, once appointed, must complete 10 hours of continuing education every 2 years on topics similar to the training subject matter. 22 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 3713

[LadyShea]

Originally Posted by Naruto

What I mean is, can they actually do anything other than annoy this poster?

Possibly, depends on the state. In the FL statutes they can seize animals if they want to.

2) Any law enforcement officer or any agent of any county or of any society or association for the prevention of cruelty to animals appointed under the provisions of s. 828.03 may:

(a) Lawfully take custody of any animal found neglected or cruelly treated by removing the animal from its present location, or

(b) Order the owner of any animal found neglected or cruelly treated to provide certain care to the animal at the owner's expense without removal of the animal from its present location, and shall forthwith petition the county court judge of the county wherein the animal is found for a hearing, to be set within 30 days after the date of seizure of the animal or issuance of the order to provide care and held not more than 15 days after the setting of such date, to determine whether the owner, if known, is able to provide adequately for the animal and is fit to have custody of the animal. The hearing shall be concluded and the court order entered thereon within 60 days after the date the hearing is commenced. No fee shall be charged for the filing of the petition. Nothing herein is intended to require court action for the taking into custody and making proper disposition of stray or abandoned animals as lawfully performed by animal control agents.

[ChuckF]

Originally Posted by LadyShea

This is scary to me. Some mayor can decide to grant authority to private citizens to investigate other citizens...without due process or probable cause?

Or sheriffs. I would imagine that the extent of deputization powers is laid out in state and local laws. Here's the $x=Advanced#0-0-0-92355]Wisconsin section on deputies, just because it was the first one I could find.

Wow, really hates that link, but it seems to work.

[Freddy]

In MA the MSPCA, Massachusetts Society for the Prevention and Cruelty to Animals, is the law enforcement agency that protects animals from cruelty. Calling the local dog officer/animal control may not solve a problem. I have never heard that the MSPCA overstepped its authority.

"In addition to enforcing animal cruelty laws, MSPCA law enforcement officers have conducted inspections of state-licensed teaching and testing animal research facilities, pet shops, riding and boarding stables, boarding kennels, guard dog facilities and carriage horse operators. Our officers also are also present to have monitored activities such as rodeos, horse and oxen pulls, science fairs, and many other events that use or feature animals. Annually, the MSPCA Law Enforcement Department inspects more than 100,000 animals."
MSPCA-Angell: About Law Enforcement

[wildernesse]

Well, on one hand, crimes against animals are often not prosecuted at all by law enforcement, and deputizing volunteer organizations means that cursory glances are being taken at people who are reported as being abusive.

In any event, there is due process set out below in the statute you cited here:

2) Any law enforcement officer or any agent of any county or of any society or association for the prevention of cruelty to animals appointed under the provisions of s. 828.03 may:

(a) Lawfully take custody of any animal found neglected or cruelly treated by removing the animal from its present location, or

(b) Order the owner of any animal found neglected or cruelly treated to provide certain care to the animal at the owner's expense without removal of the animal from its present location, and shall forthwith petition the county court judge of the county wherein the animal is found for a hearing, to be set within 30 days after the date of seizure of the animal or issuance of the order to provide care and held not more than 15 days after the setting of such date, to determine whether the owner, if known, is able to provide adequately for the animal and is fit to have custody of the animal. The hearing shall be concluded and the court order entered thereon within 60 days after the date the hearing is commenced. No fee shall be charged for the filing of the petition. Nothing herein is intended to require court action for the taking into custody and making proper disposition of stray or abandoned animals as lawfully performed by animal control agents.

In emergency situations, such as the cruel treatment of an animal, due process considerations are taken as soon as possible--once the animal is treated or removed from the dangerous situation, then there will be a hearing within 30 days and resolution within 60 days. That is not out of character with due process considerations as I am aware.

Anyway, probable cause likely stems from the call/report. Police officers will show up to your house if someone calls in about shouting or someone wandering around in the yard with a serious injury. It's not that different from animal control (in whatever form it takes) showing up after a call that there is a dog with a wound from a collar eating into its flesh or unusually thin.

I'm not sure why this is that unusual, except that some places have volunteer animal control, just like some places have volunteer firemen.

[LadyShea]

What worries me is, as I stated in my OP, many humane societies are actually fronts for extremists animal rights organizations. Someone with an agenda cannot investigate objectively.

FL law does seem to have some safeguards in place...I just find it bothersome. Notice in the statute it mentions societies for prevention of cruelty to animals or children? Why children as well?

[S.Vashti]

Originally Posted by LadyShea

What worries me is, as I stated in my OP, many humane societies are actually fronts for extremists animal rights organizations. Someone with an agenda cannot investigate objectively.

FL law does seem to have some safeguards in place...I just find it bothersome. Notice in the statute it mentions societies for prevention of cruelty to animals or children? Why children as well?

Perhaps it's because both are treated in law similarly: as property under the ownership/responsibility of another?

[wildernesse]

Originally Posted by LadyShea

What worries me is, as I stated in my OP, many humane societies are actually fronts for extremists animal rights organizations. Someone with an agenda cannot investigate objectively.

Do you have any citations to this? To me, this sounds like the sort of thing that tars all "humane societies" with the same brush when there is only one example of a humane society as a front for extremists. Do you have any evidence that the deputized humane societies and animal shelters are fronts for these organizations? The ASPCA and the American Humane society are probably the most well known and largest of these organizations, and they are not fronts for animal rights groups.

FL law does seem to have some safeguards in place...I just find it bothersome. Notice in the statute it mentions societies for prevention of cruelty to animals or children? Why children as well?

This is common, and probably stems from some historical reason linking the two. The American Humane society is a society for the prevention of cruelty to animals and children, so maybe the law took it from their mission.

[LadyShea]

Originally Posted by wildernesse

Do you have any citations to this? To me, this sounds like the sort of thing that tars all "humane societies" with the same brush when there is only one example of a humane society as a front for extremists. Do you have any evidence that the deputized humane societies and animal shelters are fronts for these organizations? The ASPCA and the American Humane society are probably the most well known and largest of these organizations, and they are not fronts for animal rights groups.

The Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) is an animal rights group (though they have changed from animal welfare to animal rights over a period of many years, and their agenda is hidden), though the American Humane Association and the ASPCA are not, you are correct. How can one tell who any local humane society is affiliated with?

I don't meant to paint with a broad brush, really, and have not searched each states regulations. My entire discomfort stems from private, non-profit organizations, with who knows what credentials or agenda, having law enforcement authority. Seems too easily abused.

Take a scenario of an older dog with arthritis (of which I have had several) we managed their pain, but sometimes they still were in pain and/or had some stiffness and difficulty, just as a human with arthritis might. What if some private animal cop decided that was cruel of me and forced me to put my dog down? Just scares me because there are different interpretations of cruelty...ya know?

My friends dog was hit by a car, and severely injured. She was skin and bones and had extreme difficulties during her recuperation, but today is a healthy happy girl. I, personally, would have had her put down, my friend chose differently. If I were given authority, would my choices trump hers?

Starving or beating or baiting a dog, clearly cruel,...but there are grey areas.