Vermont Legislature SmartTranscripts:

[Matthew Birong (Chair)]: Hi. Okay, good morning, everyone. We are back up in our committee room after the public hearing down in Room 11. It is February 18. Yes. Wednesday, just shy of 11AM, and the first order of business this morning for the committee is h six three two, an act relating to miscellaneous environmental amendments. And, I have this up for a straw poll on the sections of the bill that we heard about yesterday. You know, we decided to hold off on that straw poll so folks could marinate on it for the evening. But here we are, and I know that our environment committee is waiting for us to take a position on this. So, I guess I'll just open it up to the table for thoughts or discussion before I ask for first away in via thumbs. Yes, representative Hango.

[Lisa Hango (Vice Chair)]: Thanks. I just want to thank you for giving us some extra time so that marinate on it, think about it. Yeah, appreciate that.

[Matthew Birong (Chair)]: In your other hands right now, I mean, I think I have a good understanding of the intent of those sections, that we reviewed. So unless there are other thoughts or considerations to share. Okay. I will ask for a thumbs up for a straw poll for a show of support for the sections. Is Mary-Katherine with us?

[Lucy Boyden (Clerk)]: I can text you. This is the environmental six thirty two. Right. I just texted him. Okay. Well, hold a second.

[Matthew Birong (Chair)]: And I'm actually gonna hold one more second and see if I can see if I can run off the middle. Representative Hooper Randolph won't be able to join us. So give a moment to see it.

[Lucy Boyden (Clerk)]: No,

[Matthew Birong (Chair)]: actually what I'll do is, I'm going to hold on this until we have, denser body mass of lymphedema. So we'll postpone the straw poll on this until we have recuperated breast milk available. And that puts us on time, for age eight four one, an act relating to miscellaneous animal welfare seizures.

[Lucy Boyden (Clerk)]: And

[Matthew Birong (Chair)]: going in a porter, I guess representative, is this the line? Porter?

[Lucy Boyden (Clerk)]: Yeah. Lisa's ready. Wonderful. How are you doing? Great. How are you?

[Matthew Birong (Chair)]: I'm good.

[Lisa Mylett (Director of Animal Welfare, Vermont Department of Public Safety)]: Great. Thank you very much for having me here today. I'm Lisa Mylett. I'm the director of animal welfare in the Department of Safety for Vermont, and I appreciate being invited to come in and talk about this bill. So to preface it, I want to tell you that the Department of Public Safety has its own internal review for bills, and they don't do that until a bill has reached the floor. And so DPS does not have a position on this bill right now. There are a couple of things I'm going to mention that might be a little bit beyond the scope of what we can accomplish right now, but I do just want you to know that I'm not going to be commenting on overall approach by DPS to this bill today, But I have a I have some line item things to talk about, and I'm gonna be giving you feedback based on what I've heard from shelter staff, rescue volunteers, veterinarians, as well as what I know about animal welfare. So first of all, I think the bill does a couple of things that are really important to get started. There's some tweaks I might suggest to them if that's what you guys want to do. For example, the rabies vaccinator provision that you're considering, I think is a really important one. So I'm going to talk more about that when we get there. On page two and three, when it's talking about the establishment of the Division of Animal Welfare, just want to flag that I'm happy to have you give me responsibilities for this upcoming year. You have my comprehensive plan. And feel free to tell me what to do. That's just a minor point. But then on page five, with respect to the rule making provisions. If we look at lines 11 through 13 on page five, it's about requiring outdoor cats to be spayed and neutered and licensed. And This is something that might be worth thinking about whether or not you want to move on this this year. I know that farmers have some concerns with these provisions because a number of them have barn cats. You'd want to consider whether this is the year to have a new fee associated with something. But one thing that might be helpful here, instead of this focus, is I know that shelters and rescues that act as impound organizations from municipalities. When a stray cat is picked up, they might be taken to one of the shelters to be held for the owner to find them. Those impounding facilities would have an interest in being able to spay and neuter stray cats that come in as quickly as possible. Right now, lot of jurisdictions don't have stray hold periods that tell them when they're allowed to do things. And so sterilization of cats is something that generally is under due process analysis because it's something that's for the public good. You have fewer bites, so less rabies possibility. The animals do get rabies vaccinated when they're being spayed and neutered, and there's just less killing of wildlife and things like that with spayed and neutered cats. One possibility would be to have a provision that allows impound agencies to spay and neuter cats as soon as they come in. Erica Holm, whom you heard from last time, who is the director of Central Vermont Humane Society pulled some data on cat reclaims because they do act as Central Vermont Humane Society does act as an impound facility for several municipalities. And in 2025 they impounded 75 stray cats. Of those 19 were already spayed or neutered, and half of those were reflamed. So half of the spayed and neutered cats get reflamed. But of the remaining cats, which is 56 intact unaltered cats that were impounded, zero got reclaimed. And that really matched with national statistics and what I saw when I was in Georgia. Is that people with intact cats that are straying often aren't looking for them. They might be a cat they're caring for, but they don't really think of as theirs or for whatever reason, they don't look for them quickly. And so from the perspective of harming individual pet owner rights by requiring spay neuter quickly, it doesn't seem like you're going to be negatively impacting those rights. And so that might be something to start with here instead of the licensing program, just authorizing the shelters and rescues to spay and neuter a cat as soon as it comes in. Because a lot of times if a cat comes in, let's say on a Thursday, but all of their spay and neuter appointments were Wednesday, they're going to have to wait a while. But if one opens up, they want to be able to get it in as quickly as possible. And so with respect to cats, especially since they aren't large businesses, catteries are not huge money makers for anyone. And the people who are breeding their cats don't let them wander because they don't want random cat breeding them. That might be a way to deal with that particular provision. I'm sorry? Catteries. That's what you call a facility that holds cats for breeding. And there are actually kitten mills in some states, like there are puppy mills. But Vermont is not known for its kitten mills, have to tell you, which is a good thing.

[Matthew Birong (Chair)]: There's a couple of vocabulary bills from the day. Thank you.

[Lisa Mylett (Director of Animal Welfare, Vermont Department of Public Safety)]: Waters Evans. This is

[Chea Waters Evans (Ranking Member)]: relevant to absolutely nothing that we're talking about right now, you just reminded me. I remember when we were working on the initial bill a few years ago, Ledge Council told us that there's a name that applies to gerbils, hamster. Is it smallies or do you know what I'm

[Lisa Mylett (Director of Animal Welfare, Vermont Department of Public Safety)]: talking about? I do know what you're talking about in the rescue world. They do call them smallies.

[Chea Waters Evans (Ranking Member)]: Okay, they do. I just want to verify that fact. A very important fact.

[Lisa Mylett (Director of Animal Welfare, Vermont Department of Public Safety)]: That is a very, very important.

[Chea Waters Evans (Ranking Member)]: So more terminology for today. Yes, thank you.

[Lisa Mylett (Director of Animal Welfare, Vermont Department of Public Safety)]: Then at the bottom of that page, if we start at line 16, it tells us the director of animal welfare shall have the same authority to inspect pet dealers, animal shelters, breast children, invasions, panels as municipal animal control officers have to inspect pet dealers. And one of the things I want to suggest is right now, I am the only employee of the Division of Animal Welfare. And I think that it's quite possible that situation is going to continue for the near future. Of course, you could prove me wrong. But to the extent that is the case, inspections and licensing require enforcement. And it might be that a comprehensive review of those provisions to build to the future makes more sense than having them immediately be inspectable. I think that's something that DPS is not looking for more enforcement opportunities right now, unless there's a clear need and funding for them. And so one preliminary step before getting to any sort of licensing or inspection regime might just be to have the animal industries register with the division. And registry would be free, so there's no fees being imposed. And it would respond to the Animal Cruelty Investigation Advisory Board's request each year, that there be some oversight of activities. And this would just be no enforcement mechanism would be necessarily tied to it, but just where rescues, shelters, freighters and importers would register. And that means we can start having conversations about what sort of regulations make sense. Right now, it's not even clear who the stakeholders are in this world. And so it's hard to start having conversations about what are your norms, what are the things that would be helpful for you, and what sort of structure we got negatively impact your business. And so that might be a preliminary step to getting to the full licensing and inspection regime that doesn't have any financial costs associated with it. Doesn't have any sort of regulatory structure around it. And it would help move towards the recommendations of the ACIAB. Page six. Line 15. This is a small ask, but the language suggests that any donations or gifts made to the fund could be accepted by the Animal Welfare Fund. I would ask that grants be included. So to the extent I can secure grants to work on this, I'd love to have those be able to run through the animal welfare fund. Page seven. This was flagged when your committee was discussing the original presentation of the bill. So line 16 through 19 talks about not owning more than 35 dogs. I might take out licensed under this section. The idea is to put a cap on the number of potential breeding dogs anyone has. There's reports that large commercial breeders, puppy mills have moved into some parts of the state because there really is no regulation of them. And so this would just be a, hey, you can't have more than this many. And that 35 number is really, as I understand it, picked so that we don't interfere with hunting kennels. We don't wanna step on their toes at this point in time, but a puppy mill might have 200 intact dogs. And so we putting some sort of cap to prevent that excessive breeding. And one of the things when your committee was discussing this provision was saying, well, shouldn't private people have fewer? And that would be a possibility down the road. Generally, that's done with no one can have more than, let's say, eight dogs unless their license is a kennel, a rescue, unless there's some licensing component. But once again, I don't think we're quite at the licensing component piece. So this puts a cap on it to take care of the worst cases. It excludes and I would recommend having language be excluding the number of dogs permitted under the subsection, dogs less than four months old, and dogs that the owner can prove have been sexually sterilized shall not be counted. This takes care of the breeding issue without impacting hunting kennels and also without impacting rescues or shelters that might have more than 35 dogs in their care, but those are gonna be spayed and neutered. And so that's that's a way to sort of take steps towards towards improving things without, I think, is putting in place a structure that really isn't quite ready.

[Robert Hooper (Member)]: I did. Rep Hooper, did you have a question? Yeah. We have a lot of officers in the state.

[Lisa Mylett (Director of Animal Welfare, Vermont Department of Public Safety)]: Not to my knowledge. That doesn't mean it doesn't exist. But I know that there are specific provisions under cruelty law, for example, providing for different tethering requirements if dogs are being trained or part of competitive dog sledding. That said, I haven't heard of I have not heard reports of mushers actually.

[Lisa Hango (Vice Chair)]: There are organizations that do sled dog excursions.

[Lisa Mylett (Director of Animal Welfare, Vermont Department of Public Safety)]: Learn something new every day. Vocabulary for some. Then page eight, down at 14 through 17, it's about hybrids. I would suggest removing six months of age or older. So before obtaining a license for a wolf hybrid, a person shall deliver to the municipal court. So if somebody licenses their dog at four months, let's say, he's rabies the wolf hybrid at four months because he's already been rabies vaccinated, this would mean that he would have to be altered by then as well. Otherwise, they buy an extra year. With wolf hybrids, two reasons to think about restricting them in some way. One is that about a third of states either ban them entirely or require permits for them because they are generally considered wild animals, not domestic animals because, especially the ones that have higher wolf content act much more like wild animals than they do like domestic animals. And as a corollary about the second point is that about 67% of about two thirds of wolf hybrids end up getting euthanized when they hit social maturity, which is about two or three years of age. Because they are more like wild animals than domestic animals. And so not breeding them would be one step towards not encouraging the production of animals that are very likely to have a short lifespan and could very well cause a lot of problems. Wolf hybrids are known for being able to scale 10 foot fences easily, so confining them is really difficult. They also are generally really timid with most people. They might bond with their person, but that means they also have severe separation anxiety when separated from that person and will break out of houses. Just because they that confinement is a problem if their person is not there. So the one thing I would say is that well, two things I would say. One is I would say on line 17 instead of saying wolf hybrid has been spayed or neutered, would say sexually sterilized. Vasectomies are a thing for dogs and dog mixes. So if you want to allow for slightly broader or if chemical castration is something that's an option, just using sexually sterilized, so spayed or neutered. It gives more options. It might be worth checking with the Vermont League of Towns and Cities and seeing if there are wolf hybrid breeders licensed in jurisdictions. There are pet dealer licensing requirements. And just if we're saying that they have to get spayed or neutered, I think we want to check and see if there's any currently legally compliant businesses. So those ones with pet dealer licenses that also have sales tax numbers associated with them. There are definitely wolf hybrid breeders advertising that they're in Vermont on Facebook. I don't know that they're properly licensed. I don't know that they collect and pay sales tax. So that's just something I think maybe Vermont League of Towns and Cities could help pretty easily with finding out from their town clerks whether there are businesses that should be contacted.

[Chea Waters Evans (Ranking Member)]: Evans. So pet dealers need a license. Right? They

[Lisa Mylett (Director of Animal Welfare, Vermont Department of Public Safety)]: do. There are not that many issued in the state, but there but it's in the statute, and and town clerk's are supposed to collect $25 from pet deal licenses. So it's people who breed and sell, I think, more than five litters a year. Okay. Might be three litters. I I forget what the number is. So there is a pet dealer licensing program. You answered my next question,

[Chea Waters Evans (Ranking Member)]: which is who enforces it?

[Lisa Mylett (Director of Animal Welfare, Vermont Department of Public Safety)]: Town clerk. Nominally, at least I don't know that. I don't know what the enforcement is like.

[Chea Waters Evans (Ranking Member)]: It does it operate similarly like a dog license would like it's just voluntary. Okay, thank you. Wait, you mean dog licenses aren't mandatory? In theory, they're mandatory. It's where a town clerk has to chase people around, getting up to register their dogs. Yes.

[Lisa Mylett (Director of Animal Welfare, Vermont Department of Public Safety)]: Okay, then on the next page, on page nine, one of the changes here is to take away the special breeder license for dogs and wolf hybrids. Right now, if you own a dog that is spayed or neutered, sexually sterilized, the base cost for a license is $11 If you own one that's not, I think the base cost is $15 or $16 I forgot what the premium is for being intact. But if you have you can buy bulk breeder licenses that reduce the cost of $4 a license. And that's actually contrary to best practices. It's incentivizing large breeders as opposed to giving benefits for the private owners who might have their animals altered or for the the person who has two or three intact dogs that they show or compete with and might breed occasionally. So this instead encourages puppy mills and larger breeders by giving them a discount on the dog licensing. By removing that on page nine, it's making it compliant with that diagnosis. All right, certified rabies vaccinator program. As you know from my comprehensive plan, I think these programs can be really beneficial. And I've gotten some feedback based on the initial proposal here. Then I also pulled the statutes from Maine, Arizona and North Carolina. They all have certified rabies vaccinator programs. And then South Carolina had a proposed program. So I wanted to see overall what's going on with these programs and then think about in terms of what might work best for Vermont. Under the original drafting of the language, the certified rabies vaccinator program would allow humane officers to vaccinate, if trained for rabies vaccination, to be able to administer rabies vaccines. And as we talked about when I presented on the comprehensive plan, access to vet care is an issue in Vermont. A lot of vets have waiting lists. ACOs are telling me they return animals without getting rabies vaccinations, or they have to hold them at their houses for an extra couple of days trying to get into a vet to get a rabies vaccination. And so increasing rabies vaccination rates helps all of us. Rabies rates in Vermont, as I understand it, have been going up in recent years. Rabies obviously is something that people can get as well. So one of the big ways for people from getting rabies is to make sure our pets are rabies vaccinated. And livestock, because livestock actually cows are apparently the second largest category of domestic animals that get infected with rabies nationally. And that's because they're in fields at night, so there's bats. But yeah, cows, horses. There was actually a domestic rabbit, I believe, last year in Vermont that came back positive for rabies, which I had never heard of a rabbit before having it, but they're a mammal. There's been goats in past years. There are always a couple of cats in Vermont every year. So increasing rabies vaccination rates of domestic animals, both livestock and pets, is a real benefit. But vets have waiting lists for new clients. A lot of times homesteaders and even larger farmers have difficulty getting a vet on their property because the amount of time a vet has to travel to get to a property to see livestock. So expanding the number of people who can safely, responsibly, legally give rabies vaccinations can help a lot with this. And there's three categories of potential people that you might want to consider being able to be authorized as rabies vaccinators. Each of them will be operating under the indirect supervision of a veterinarian. So a veterinarian would say, hey, I feel comfortable with this person giving rabies vaccinations. I know that they know how to do it, and I'm willing to have my name attached to them even if I'm not physically present. So that would be vet staff. Right now vet staff can give vaccines in Vermont if the vet is directly on premises supervising. You can loosen it up so it could be indirect supervision. And that way, a vet tech, for example, could go to a farm. It doesn't have to be a vet and could help with all of this. Second category would be shelter staff. So animal shelters that have employed staff that already give other vaccines, their vet of record could be the indirectly supervising veterinarian for them. Once again, with training, with that vet's oversight, because shelters that act as impound facilities are, as you heard from Erica, I believe, last week, what Central Vermont does if they have a dog that comes in, for example, or a cat that's getting reclaimed and it doesn't have a rabies vaccination, if that's not the one day a week the vet is there to give the rabies vaccination, they take a $50 deposit and the person is supposed to go get the rabies vaccination, then they get their deposit back. People don't come back with that deposit. When the animal comes in again, it becomes clear that the animal never got the rabies vaccine. So having shelter staff be able to administer rabies vaccines under the indirect supervision of a vet would allow those animals all to be getting altered not altered, to be getting rabies vaccinated before they go back to their homes, once again giving us a better barrier. Because those animals that are straying, the ones coming in that are getting reclaimed, those animals are actually a high risk for exposure to rabies because they are out in the world and interacting without their person there. So they're much more apt to interact with a wild animal or another or a domestic animal. So that would be the second category. So vet staff under the indirect supervision of a vet, shelter staff under the indirect supervision of a vet. And then third category is what's currently in the bill, the humane officers. Right now, are only if we put aside sworn law enforcement, because we don't expect sworn law enforcement to be giving rabies vaccines, there are only about two or three humane officers officers in in the the state currently. People who are employed by my division who have been trained for investigations are able to be humane officers. There are none of those. And then animal control officers who work for a law enforcement agency like a local police department can also be humane officers. There are a handful of those people in the state. Most of them have not been trained as human officers, but they could be. And then they could assist with the local ACOs. An ACO who might not be able to get the animal to the shelter easily go to the Humane Officer. If the Humane Officer is on a property and helping with the situation, they could administer the vaccines.

[Lisa Hango (Vice Chair)]: Thank you. Would that also include Fish and Wildlife Game Wardens?

[Lisa Mylett (Director of Animal Welfare, Vermont Department of Public Safety)]: In theory, would. They're humane officers because they are sworn law enforcement. So I not expect that many of the law enforcement I don't expect Vermont State Police to want to become rabies vaccinator. But you're right. It might be that the game wardens are more interested in becoming that, and then they could. And they'd have to have a vet once again that was willing to sign off on them doing it under their auspices, but that could be a really beneficial thing as well. And with respect to the vet staff, and I believe this came up when your committee was talking about, with respect to vet staff and shelter staff, I would expect that there could be a charge for that. I don't think that it has to be on the volunteer basis. In Maine at least, the humane officers who are giving rabies vaccinations do it. They don't get paid for the service of giving the vaccine. They can be reimbursed for the vaccine, for the cost of it. If they paid $8 for vaccine itself, they can get reimbursed for that. But they're not people who are going out in the field and saying, hey. I'll vaccinate your animal if you pay me $20. So that's the distinction there. But with vet staff and shelter staff, they're both working for an organization. And that might be a case where they can charge for the rabies vaccine the way anyone else would. But that's what I would say on that front. I know that Doctor. Sarah White is going to be speaking after me, and I think she's going to talk some about the rabies vaccinator program. She's a member of the board of the Vermont Veterinary Medical Association, and so she's actually a really good one to speak to the vet approach, with respect to the rabies vaccinator program. Did

[Matthew Birong (Chair)]: you have a

[Lisa Mylett (Director of Animal Welfare, Vermont Department of Public Safety)]: follow-up?

[Lisa Hango (Vice Chair)]: I did. So speaking about that compensation on line nine eleven, the poll says to not accept compensation for administering rabies vaccines or providing services related to rabies vaccination, I would almost like to see that qualified by adding in applause that says, unless it is part of your job description. Because those people are going to get paid if they're working for a veterinary office. They're going to get paid. And this would preclude them from getting paid. So I would want to make sure that they would get their regular pay. But this is just for any person to go around saying, just say, pay me to give a rabies vaccination to your female. Thank you.

[Chea Waters Evans (Ranking Member)]: Thank you, that was an excellent. I just want to be clear, if the law enforcement officers are humane officers, just by nature of their job. But we are not saying that they are also going to be in any way asked to all to be rabies vaccinator, or certified rabies vaccinators. I just want

[Lisa Mylett (Director of Animal Welfare, Vermont Department of Public Safety)]: to not be asking them to do it, but they would be eligible to get trained and do it if they chose. I don't think they're going to. But I could imagine someone in a small town where there's not a vet there, that might be part of the local police force. Maybe they want to. But no, we would not be asking them to add this onto their I would not recommend you all making the policy decision to ask them to become rabies vaccinators.

[Chea Waters Evans (Ranking Member)]: No, I don't think that was the intention at all. I just wanted to make it really clear that that is not what we were asking for or aiming for in any way.

[Lisa Mylett (Director of Animal Welfare, Vermont Department of Public Safety)]: Yes, I don't think that DPS is looking to get into the vet care business. No.

[Chea Waters Evans (Ranking Member)]: Nor should they. Thank you.

[Lisa Mylett (Director of Animal Welfare, Vermont Department of Public Safety)]: My next comments are on page 14. On page 14, for now I would recommend taking out the lines four through seven about the licensing by the originating state for importing. Once again, that's kind of in the licensing world, and I think that needs to be reviewed comprehensively and come back at a later time with an overall plan. I feel like with the advertising that's at the bottom of page 14, that's planning for the future. There's no enforcement mechanism written into this. And that can be fine. It can be norm setting and just setting it up for when there's an overall scheme. I just wanted to flag that there is no enforcement mechanism there. That can obviously be a choice you all make as this is a first step. We're going to ask them to do it. To the extent you're doing that, I might suggest on line 20, instead of just saying the current location, I might say the city and state of the animal to make it clear what we mean by location. And then on line 21, there seems like there's two options. You either have a 501c3 that's doing this sort of advertising, so we would want their employment identification number so that we know who they are, And a statement they're a five zero one(three). Or we're going want the sales tax number. Once again, this nudges people to getting into compliance with the current law because you're either a C3, so the amounts you're getting from selling these animals are tax exempt. Or you're not a C3, in which case the amounts that you're getting from selling these animals are subject to income and sales tax laws. And so requiring that you either do the EIN and the statement that you're a C3, can be verified easily then, because the EIN, you can look it up on the IRS website, confirm they're a C3. Or your sales tax number, that nudges people to understand that, hey, I need a sales tax number if I'm engaged in this business. That is everything I marked on here. Do you all have any questions about any of the other items, or anything I can help with? It seems like this is nice planning for the future, there's a good way to As well as, I kind of see my job right now as trying to get some sand out of the gears. There are a lot of things that are operating, but they're a little bit glitchy. Things like the rabies vaccinator provision, I think, help get the sand out of the gear and just get things moving ahead so that improvements can be made. Before there's some huge overhaul. I think thoughtful overhaul makes sense. I respect that perspective. Thank you. Any questions?

[Matthew Birong (Chair)]: No, thank you so much for that feedback.

[Chea Waters Evans (Ranking Member)]: Thank you.

[Matthew Birong (Chair)]: And now joining us via Zoom, we have Sarah White.

[Dr. Sarah White (Vermont Veterinary Medical Association)]: Hello. Can you hear me?

[Matthew Birong (Chair)]: Can hear you and see you. How are

[Dr. Sarah White (Vermont Veterinary Medical Association)]: Hi. Good to good to talk to you all. Thank you for inviting me. I was able to listen to most of Lisa's testimony, and I would say that I agree with her comments on what I was able to hear. And I think the the first thing I want to discuss is the rabies vaccinator program. And I think that the way that Lisa covered it describes a way that I think would be acceptable having those three different categories of potential eligible vaccinators as employees of a veterinary clinic who the veterinarian, is willing to certify, the staff members of humane organizations and humane officers as the three categories. And in in discussions with other veterinarians in the VVMA government relations committee, the main concerns are the adequacy of training to make sure that the people who are providing these vaccines understand how the vaccines should be stored, how they should be administered, ensuring that the paperwork is completed properly and that the owner receives appropriate documentation and that that documentation is accessible and available should a public health need arise. And what what that is saying is if that animal is either exposed to a rabid animal or an unknown bite or if that animal is in a situation where they bite or scratch and draw blood from a human, that there will need to be verification that the rabies vaccine has occurred. And so there has to be a a ability within the vaccinator program to trace back that in the case of exposure, to trace back who gave the vaccine and to make sure that it was a valid vaccine so that the animal and the people exposed to that animal are truly protected, by that vaccine. So it my summary of the the veterinarian's concerns really have to do with with adequate training and adequate documentation. But at least among the veterinarians discussing the rabies vaccinator program on the on the VVMA discussion, there there wasn't a particular concern about the overall concept of having a rabies vaccinator. So it wasn't being perceived as undue competition or anything of that sort. But we are strongly interested in making sure that the people doing it have had training and that, again, that the documentation is all very appropriate and traceable. And I think that the revisions that Lisa is working on will cover that need for training and traceability. Any any questions or anything that I need to clarify on the vaccinator issue? For you guys.

[Matthew Birong (Chair)]: Yeah. Pausing for questions from anyone. So

[Chea Waters Evans (Ranking Member)]: currently, hi, thanks for coming here. If there's someone who can, like who a staff member, who did Lisa say could already, who's not a vet who can vaccinate an animal for rabies. Where do they get their training from?

[Dr. Sarah White (Vermont Veterinary Medical Association)]: That is a decision made in house at the veterinary clinic. So currently, since it is under direct supervision, they are vaccinating because the veterinarian has decided that they have the skills to provide the vaccine and that the practice itself has the documentation and vaccine storage to properly make sure that that vaccine itself is a good vaccine, like that it hasn't been ruined in some way by being left out in the sunlight for extended periods of time, and also to ensure that there is documentation both within the practice and for the owner of that vaccine being given. So that there's not a specific training for a person currently to give the vaccine as long as it's under that direct supervision. So in a veterinary clinic setting, it would be a pretty small change to be able to have those vet techs give or vet assistants give a vaccine under indirect supervision as Lisa was proposing. But, it would be a bigger leap, a bigger ask for those who are working in humane societies that may not currently ever have a vet on-site physically to now have the rabies certificates that they can produce and be able to re retrieve that information if there's ever a question to be able to issue certificates and tags for those animals. So that's where the bigger change would be. And similarly, for humane officers that are not affiliated with a shelter or vet clinic, that they would have to be able to produce the documentation and then access that documentation. And, again, humane officers may not currently have experience with vaccines and how to handle them and how to administer them depending on what their previous experience is. So that would be another training thing. So so, yeah, I think or within a vet practice, it would be the smallest increment, but may also be a situation where many vet clinics will not see that it is that that there would be any gain in doing that because they are already able to do the indirect do the direct supervision option, and they're they don't have a need in their practice for the indirect option. Although I agree with the potentially more rural practices, single veterinarian practices that might see an advantage in being able to allow staff members to either go off-site to a farm or house and administer the vaccine or to be able to administer the vaccine when the veterinarian is not physically at work that day, that the staff would still be able to provide that service to the public. Did that answer what you what you needed? It did. Thank you. Okay.

[Matthew Birong (Chair)]: Representative. Would

[Lisa Hango (Vice Chair)]: that also include community events, for instance, if this program weren't in place that a vet tech could go to a town hall, for instance, and people will bring their animals there for rabies vaccines. They do that now with a veterinarian. Would that be covered under this umbrella?

[Dr. Sarah White (Vermont Veterinary Medical Association)]: My understanding is that it would be. Although I would ask that Lisa as a lawyer would be able better able to read the nuance of the law. But my understanding is that that that would be a possibility. And I'm not sure in the real world how often that would be taken up, like how often that option would be used. Although I think that in some areas, it may be hard to find a veterinarian interested in doing those clinics and to be able to offer it without taking that veterinarian's time may be an easier option for more clinics to be offered and more access to be provided. Great. Thank you. Okay. Any other questions? Yeah, sorry.

[Matthew Birong (Chair)]: I was just gonna say that same thing. You and I are in the same mindset. Yeah, any other questions from the table for our guests?

[Chea Waters Evans (Ranking Member)]: No.

[Matthew Birong (Chair)]: No, thank you for the input. This conversation is a work in progress. So that input was definitely a good resource for us. Thank you.

[Dr. Sarah White (Vermont Veterinary Medical Association)]: And one additional part of the H eight forty one that I did want to comment on, and I missed whether Lisa also commented on the CAT. It would it's on page five lines 11 through 14 or 11 through 13 requiring outdoor cats to be spayed, neutered, and licensed. That is definitely a concern among both shelters and among veterinarians, especially those who work with farmers. The difficulty of complying with that or the potential for for it to feel punitive for farmers who have barn cats to be required to do this, which can be a very expensive proposition if they've got quite a few cats. But and that they're, yeah, I guess I I sorry for not having my thoughts as together on this one. That it would be hard to hard financially for people with barn cats to get all these procedures done and pay for licensing on these animals that may have arrived on their own or been dumped off at their place. And that it also could be difficult for organizations that are trying to reduce cat populations by doing trap, neuter, return, whether in farms or in villages to be able to have try to discover ownership or, like, define ownership for these village cats or otherwise typically unowned cats and to pay for licensing of them. I'm sorry. I'm not being as clear on this. It's I think it's just a would be a very difficult law to enforce and would more likely be counterproductive or have a chilling effect on efforts to actually get those cats neutered and vaccinated because of the fear of being in in trouble for not having all of them done. So I'm happy to answer questions, which I might be able to be more articulate on if you have any.

[Matthew Birong (Chair)]: Okay. Okay.

[Chea Waters Evans (Ranking Member)]: Waters Evans? You're perfectly articulate. Thank you. That was fine. Okay. I wouldn't worry about it. So can you mention people draw cats off at farms?

[Dr. Sarah White (Vermont Veterinary Medical Association)]: That is certainly something that I have heard described by farmers and that I think most farmers would agree with. It's and, you know, and often at at houses of people they know have cats. I think also sometimes cats who become stray for whatever reason may find themselves joining a colony at a farm. But, yes, the the idea of cats arriving at farms unexpectedly is certainly something that farmers describe. Thank you.

[Matthew Birong (Chair)]: Did you ask anything further, Jonas? You look like you're a mid thought perhaps.

[Jonas (Committee Assistant)]: Yep.

[Matthew Birong (Chair)]: Okay, cool. I just wanted to check. Any other questions from the table? Representative Hooper? This might be Nugent. Is there the equivalent of, say, a small animal Depo Provera non surgical intervention for cats sort of thing?

[Dr. Sarah White (Vermont Veterinary Medical Association)]: So there there's a lot of research being done to try to have something that is safe, effective, and lifelong that could be provided as alternative to surgery in cats and dogs. And there are candidates out there and there are certainly short term candidates out there, but typically those would last for only a year or two, which is relatively short compared to the lifespan of cats. And so therefore is not typically thought of as acceptable as a real solution if you had to keep going back every year to provide birth control for the cats. But there is research out there being done. There are some hormonal interventions that people have tried putting in, for example, in the cat food. The problems with that are that it's very hard to control exposure and keep wildlife and even children from being exposed to these hormones that you put in the food in order to control the cat population. So, essentially, not yet, but hopefully someday, which I think goes to Lisa's Lisa's comment about surgical sterilization as opposed to spaying or neutering being the forward looking language because maybe someday in a couple decades, we will be able to catch a cat, give them their space shot and their rabies shot, they're good. But we don't have that yet.

[Matthew Birong (Chair)]: Thank you. Okay. Further questions? All right. Seeing no hands. Thank you so much for your time. It's appreciated. And yeah, if you have anything to offer to the committee in the future, please don't feel shy about reaching out.

[Dr. Sarah White (Vermont Veterinary Medical Association)]: All right, thank you. And if you all have any other questions about this bill, I'm happy to answer them as well from my perspective as veterinarian, VVMA, as well as from my Humane Federation. I kind of straddle the two worlds. But I think, honestly, Lisa's coverage of it was pretty thorough. So I don't have anything else that I feel like I need to add, but I'm happy to answer or clarify anything.

[Matthew Birong (Chair)]: Wonderful. No. That's appreciated. Okay. So I think that wraps up the morning committee. We're going to still hold on that straw poll on H six thirty two until representative Hooper of Randolph is here. I'd like to have a full table when we take that. So I'm thinking right now, we'll try and squeeze that in when we return from lunch. So with that, we'll go offline until 01:00 when we attempt to address that straw poll and then also take up h eight thirty one, an act relating to requiring secretary of state to approve the year of passage in the number of assigned acts of the general assembly. Alright. With that, Nick, we can go offline.