Vermont Legislature SmartTranscripts:

[Speaker 0]: Welcome back to house judiciary. We are looking at h five seventy eight, an act relating to penalties and procedures for animal cruelty offensive. And we're gonna start with our first witness, Heather Bedditt, from the Vermonters Against Cruelty and Abandonment.

[Rep. Kenneth Goslant (Clerk)]: Mhmm.

[Speaker 0]: Heather, you could, identify yourself for the record?

[Heather Bent (Vermonters Against Cruelty and Abandonment)]: Thank you. My name is Heather Bent, and I am speaking on behalf of VACA for Monarchs Against Animal Cruelty and Abandonment in support of house bill five seventy eight. I'm also the founder of Potter's Angels Rescue, which was established in 2010 and have assisted with animal cruelty cases for over ten years. Since 2021, I've served as animal control for Marshfield, and I currently operate a dog boarding and daycare facility in Barrie, Vermont. Throughout my work in animal welfare, I've focused on implementing solutions rather than becoming overwhelmed by systemic failures. That approach led to the creation of VACA, which I cofounded with Renee Falconer, who's here today, and obtained nonprofit status in 2025. VACA operates as a collaborative statewide initiative working alongside animal control officers, law enforcement, veterinarians, animal behavior experts, rescues, shelters. It's our mission to advocate for and support animals in Vermont that have been victims of abuse, abandonment, and neglect. We provide guidance, connect resources, and offer support to facilitate a coordinated effort and effective response to emerging needs within the state. In collaboration with animal control officers and law enforcement, we strive to enhance the enforcement of our current animal protection laws and endorse improvements to better protect animals in Vermont, which is why I'm here today. As you may know, Vermont faces many challenges in animal welfare, but today, I'm gonna focus on the solutions offered in house bill five seventy eight and why this legislation is urgently needed. Under current law, animal seized for cruelty or neglect can remain in custody for months or even years while cases move through the court system. Animal cruelty cases typically take six to eighteen months to resolve. That's a long time when you're caring for an animal during that time frame. Behavioral decline in a shelter setting often begins within a few weeks. So six to eighteen months can do a lot of damage to the animal during that time. Animals deteriorate behaviorally due to the stress of isolation, adaptability declines, shelters rescues have to absorb the cost of care, courts lack consistent cost recovery methods, and in some cases, animals get returned to their abusers, forcing animal advocates to violate their moral and ethical obligations to protect those animals. These outcomes, unfortunately, are not rare or isolated, but commonplace in Vermont. Care costs on average 20 to $40 per day per animal, which covers food, staffing, and basic care. Due to the length of time in limbo, costs frequently reach 5 to $15,000 per animal and far more in multi animal cases. Currently, those costs are being absorbed by rescues, municipalities, and volunteers, not by those responsible for the abuse. And this is something that I think we need to change. Yes. For these reasons, there has been a systemic breakdown in enforcement as well. After repeatedly being burned by this current system, rescue shelters are increasingly unable or unwilling to accept seized animals. And as a result, law enforcement's ability to enforce cruelty laws has been severely compromised. I have personally been told by law enforcement officers as well as game wardens that they were instructed by their superiors not to seize animals due to the lack of placement options and funding. State attorneys have also declined to pursue search warrants for the same reason, leaving animals in environments where they continue to suffer. Until Vermont provides the tools and support necessary to enforce and prosecute its animal protection laws, those laws will remain largely inconsequential. Civil forfeiture was in introduced into the statute in, I think, February. Yep. Animals are still being trapped in legal limbo, treated as property that can be stashed somewhere indefinitely. And the fact is animals are sentient beings. They require daily care, socialization, exercise, medical attention, food, and shelter, and that all doesn't come at no cost. They cannot simply be stuffed in a corner and forgotten about as seems to be the current thinking of what we should do with them because shelters and volunteer organizations have been taken for granted and expected to shoulder unreasonable financial and moral burdens for extended periods of time. Many are drained of resources while being told in some cases to return the animals to their abusers violating every ethical principle they stand for. This system is neither reasonable nor sustainable. Vermont has burned critical bridges by failing to address these enforcement failures. Assigning financial responsibility for seized animals to their owners is the most reasonable and just solution. The care of these animals' ongoing costs and and requiring owners either bear those costs or relinquish ownership is consistent with established principles of responsible ownership. Based on documented experience, animals subject to seizure have exhibited clear indicators of neglect as verified by licensed veterinarians. Animal ownership carries enforceable duties, including providing adequate food, shelter, veterinary care, and protection from suffering. When an animal is seized, those ethical obligations have already been breached. If an owner is unable or unwilling to assume the financial and practical responsibilities necessary for their proper care, termination of ownership rights is an appropriate and proportionate remedy. Ownership should be treated as a responsibility and not as an entitlement. House Bill five seventy eight also recognizes that accountability includes rehabilitation. It gives courts the authority to require education, treatment, and counseling for offenders, addressing the underlying behaviors that lead to cruelty, which is essential component of prevention. Animal cruelty is strongly linked to broader patterns of violence. Individuals who abuse animals are three to five times more likely to commit violent crimes against people. Up to seventy one percent of domestic violent violence victims report pets being threatened or harmed, and eighty eight percent of households under child protective services investigation also report animal abuse. Because of these correlations, the FBI classifies animal cruelty as a group a violent offense. This is a public safety issue and should not be treated as a minor crime. Approximately seventy percent of individuals charged with animal cruelty have committed at least one other crime, and forty percent have prior violent crime convictions. When cruelty is minimized early, opportunities for intervention and prevention are lost. These reforms are being presented, clarify cruelty definitions, establish consistent cost of care recovery, require meaningful animal possession bans, and create clearer forfeiture and custody pathways. Most importantly, they move Vermont from a reactive system to a preventative one, reducing repeat offenses, prolonged suffering, and the misuse of public and nonprofit resources. As Vermont improves coordination and data collection, these reforms ensure that the future data reflects effective intervention, not preventable harm. Vaca strongly urges the committee to advance House Bill five seventy eight, animals cannot testify for themselves. These reforms ensure Vermont's laws speak clearly and firmly on their behalf while also protecting public safety and public resources. Thank you for your time and commitment to protecting Vermont's most vulnerable. I appreciate it.

[Speaker 0]: Thank you. Any questions? I am wondering if you have submitted your testimony to Nate Buscotti?

[Heather Bent (Vermonters Against Cruelty and Abandonment)]: No. I haven't, but I can do that.

[Speaker 0]: That would be great. Yeah. That way we'll put it on our committee page and it'll be available to to us to to to reread and others who might wanna see it. Oh, we do have a question, representative Arsenault.

[Rep. Angela Arsenault]: Thank you very much. And thank you so much for your testimony, Heather. I was wondering if you I had the same question that representative Rachelson raised earlier about the available animal cruelty prevention programs or educational programs. Are you aware of any such programs and how available they are?

[Heather Bent (Vermonters Against Cruelty and Abandonment)]: Yeah, no, I'm not.

[Rep. Angela Arsenault]: Okay. Looks like maybe I'll ask Renee the same question when she's up. Okay, thank you.

[Speaker 0]: Any other questions? Great, thank you. You.

[Heather Bent (Vermonters Against Cruelty and Abandonment)]: Thank you.

[Speaker 0]: And next up we will have Renee Falconer, also from Vermonters Against Cruelty and Abandonment.

[Renee Falconer (Vermonters Against Cruelty and Abandonment)]: Hello, everyone, and thank you for the opportunity to speak today. Yes. My name is Renee Falconer. I live in Brownington. I'm a long time animal control officer for much of Orleans County, also co founder of Vaca along with Heather, and also another nonprofit of my own Pets of the Kingdom. I have been investigating animal cruelty and working as an animal control officer for over twenty years. In those twenty years, I witnessed firsthand where our strengths and weaknesses are. Animal cruelty is a crime that should be taken seriously. It often leads to or

[Rep. Kenneth Goslant (Clerk)]: is

[Renee Falconer (Vermonters Against Cruelty and Abandonment)]: on the coattails of many other serious and domestic crimes. Requiring education, treatment, counseling for offenders should be mandatory. As with most other crimes, we see repeat offenders. We also know that around seventy percent of people who abuse or neglect animals are also inflicting the same abuse or neglect on family members, spouses, or children. On the flip side of this, around eighty of domestic violence also involves harm to the family pet. Treatment and counseling would be addressing so much more than just animal abuse. Our civil forfeiture process does need some work. The civil forfeiture bill S237 was passed in June 2014. I actually helped to create this bill after a seizure case in 2012 in Jeffersonville, nearly bankrupt our nonprofit organization. Six draft horses were seized by law enforcement and in our care for fifteen months. The expenses exceeded $35,000 In the past eleven years, I've worked on many other seizure cases with multiple other organizations and agencies. I've seen the current civil forfeiture bill work in a few cases, but I've seen it fail in many more. Civil forfeiture needs to be utilized and understood by law enforcement, state's attorneys, and judges. Adding owner accountability for cost of care to the forfeiture bill will also be super helpful. It will force owners to either pay for the care that they should have legally been providing for those animals in the first place, or they will opt to surrender the animals, which may in turn keep many of these cases out of the court system altogether. We need to repair the system so that our unfunded volunteer based rescues and shelters don't have to struggle with care and expenses while waiting months or longer for their day in court. Oversight of offenders who are charged with animal cruelty is a must. Offenders often repeat their crimes or go against court orders and acquire more animals. I'm currently aware of two separate cases in Orleans County where the court prohibited an offender to own more animals, and yet they have more animals because there's no clear plan to prevent or prosecute this behavior. In 2025, the collaborative efforts through Vaca and all partnering shelters and rescues have saved, rehabilitated, provided care for, and rehomed a total of 2,359 abandoned, surrendered, and seized animals. Since we have no funding in Vermont for animal welfare, we need to at least, at the very least, protect our rescues, animal control officers and shelters who do this work day in and day out with nothing more than volunteers and donations. I ask that you please consider supporting this bill. Thank you.

[Speaker 0]: Thank you. Any questions?

[Rep. Angela Arsenault]: Can I ask the same?

[Joanne Bourbeau (Northeastern Regional Director, Humane World for Animals)]: Absolutely. I'll ask you

[Rep. Angela Arsenault]: the same question Renee since you seem to react to it. Do you know of any?

[Renee Falconer (Vermonters Against Cruelty and Abandonment)]: I actually have a great, very recent experience with this because I was actually reached out to by the Orleans County Probation And Parole Program because recently one of our very own Vermont animal control officers was charged with animal cruelty. And part of her criminal charges were that she had to go to some type of educational animal cruelty prevention program. The Probation and Parole Office actually reached out to me asking if I had anything up my sleeve. And I don't, so I actually reached out to Joanne Barbeau through Humane World and Vermont Humane Federation to see if there was anything. Didn't hear back. I'm assuming they're still researching that.

[Rep. Angela Arsenault]: Okay. That seems important. Thank you

[Speaker 0]: very

[Rep. Angela Arsenault]: much.

[Speaker 0]: You're welcome. Renee, you may have said the six draft horses for, I think you said five years that were that were boarded.

[Rep. Kenneth Goslant (Clerk)]: Fifteen months.

[Speaker 0]: Fifteen months. Okay. It's $35,000 Yes. Okay. I got a little bit of a rate. I'm just wondering who paid that.

[Renee Falconer (Vermonters Against Cruelty and Abandonment)]: We fundraised.

[Speaker 0]: You may have said.

[Renee Falconer (Vermonters Against Cruelty and Abandonment)]: We fundraised and got grant money to pay for all that.

[Speaker 0]: Okay.

[Renee Falconer (Vermonters Against Cruelty and Abandonment)]: And in the end, yes, the restitution, Mr. Fletcher was ordered to pay restitution. Out of the $35,000 he pushed back and they whittled it down to $6,000 out of $35,000 and that's all he had to pay. Even though we had receipts and we had everything all on paper of that $35,000 the court system whittled it down to 6. And it took seven years for him to pay back the $6,000

[Rep. Kenneth Goslant (Clerk)]: Thank you.

[Joanne Bourbeau (Northeastern Regional Director, Humane World for Animals)]: Yes.

[Speaker 0]: Any other questions? Thank you. One more from representative Arsenault.

[Rep. Angela Arsenault]: Just processing something else you said related to this, and I wanna make sure I heard you correctly. I heard you say that there is funding from the state for the care of animals that are seized. Is that correct?

[Renee Falconer (Vermonters Against Cruelty and Abandonment)]: That is correct. There's, I mean, I think I've had one cruelty case where law enforcement sees the animals and I was just asked to house them and I did get reimbursed for some of that. I don't know where that money came from, But as far as the everyday day in and day out work that we do there, we don't have any funding for animal welfare. We don't have any pot of money that we can access in cases like these.

[Rep. Angela Arsenault]: Thank you.

[Speaker 0]: Off the top of your head, but I know you can't come up with an accurate figure, but what would a budget like that look like? I mean, with this one case, 35,000.

[Renee Falconer (Vermonters Against Cruelty and Abandonment)]: It would have to be unlimited because you just don't know. I mean Right.

[Speaker 0]: Thank you.

[Rep. Kenneth Goslant (Clerk)]: Yes.

[Speaker 0]: Okay. Next up, we have Trevor Whipple, former police chief, Barry in South Burlington. If I'm not mistaken, Trevor, you've been in here before.

[Trevor Whipple (Former Police Chief, Barre and South Burlington)]: I I don't know some of your committee members. It's been a few years, but you're absolutely right, mister, acting chair. I've been there a time or two or 20. So I I thank you for the opportunity to to reappear. I'm sorry I'm not in person. For those that have not met me on the record, my name is Trevor Whipple. I was invited to testify today as a former law enforcement officer, and that's that's how I'm testifying is from my knowledge as a public servant, my experience as a police chief. In full transparency, I do work part time on contract with the Humane World from Animals and draw some of my knowledge from that experience as well. So I served as a police officer in Barrie for twenty three years, the chief there for seven and a half. Then I went up to South Burlington. I was the chief there for twelve years. So bill is near and dear to my heart. I'm also an animal advocate, rescue dogs and cats who share my house with me, and appreciate the committee taking up this bill. First, I'll speak to the part that Eric did a very good job navigating, and that is the enhancements to the sex with animals laws, the bestiality laws. I was a sex crimes investigator for about fifteen years of my time in Barrie and had more experience than I wished with those cases. I do appreciate some of the enhancements being made in the law, particularly around video, the creation possession, the showing of video, to children. Witnesses before me have done a really good job articulating what we know about the link between those that perpetrate crimes against animals and the deviant behavior, many of them go on to perpetrate against humans in domestic situations or with children. So I would certainly speak in support of all those enhancements that are being added to the animal sex crimes law. I think that although they're not used that frequently in Vermont, what we are finding is attributed somewhat to my early years, the mid eighties of investigating child sex crimes. We didn't hear much about it. The community didn't realize it was that pervasive, but once folks became educated, really started to pull the veil back and say, these things do happen in our communities. If I see something, I'm gonna come forward. I'm not gonna be uncomfortable about it. And I think we're starting to see that with sex crimes involving animals. It happens. It happens way too often. And should it come forward here in Vermont, I appreciate that this committee is considering adding some additional elements to that statute. Moving on to the civil forfeitures, cost of care sections that you folks are considering. First, I'll speak to civil forfeiture. It does exist. We used it when I was the chief in the city of South Burlington. We had a case involving just two dogs where children came forward, reported their father for pretty significantly abusing the two dogs in the household. One had received a broken leg allegedly from an assault with a lacrosse stick. There had been some chemicals sprayed in the faces of the dogs. That case went forward. We immediately applied for the civil forfeiture working with our prosecutor. What we found is no surprise to you folks that our prosecutor's offices are busy. They don't necessarily have somebody who can suddenly carve out time to file a motion of civil forfeiture and pay attention to that with the amount of time necessary. We did have a prosecutor that brought that forward. It went through the court system. It was not expeditious, although those animals only remained in custody for forty days. During that time, there was a negotiation. The gentleman that was accused did plead guilty, and part of that was that he agreed to forfeit the animals. But during that forty day period, those animals were kept in confinement with limited contact. They didn't have the care that one might expect of a family pet because they were in a kennel environment. One of them was a Rottweiler, developed kennel rage. It ended up violently attacking the caretaker, actually bit his thumb off. And so at the end of forty days, it was a pretty reasonable bill. The bill was, just over $1,900, and the court ordered that the accused, pay restitution to the city of South Burlington. When I retired in 2019, this case happened in 2011. I retired eight years later in 2019. I had not seen a penny. I, this morning, contacted the victim restitution unit at the state, and to date, the city of South Burlington has received no reimbursement for that case. So for civil forfeiture, it is a vehicle. I think it takes too long. There is some time shortening that you folks are considering. I think that that is valuable. One of the challenges is with restitution, when it's not an individual, it's not a person that was harmed, it does not pay from the restitution fund. The restitution unit has to wait for that money to come in before they can send it out. So as of this morning, that gentleman still owes everything to the city of South Burlington, and there is no, other than, attaching, they're waiting for him to get a tax return. And they told me this morning that if he does get a tax return that that money then will be encumbered by the state and given to South Burlington. Also an example, communication with the gentleman that took over for me in South Burlington, Chief Burke, who's now moved back to Burlington. But when Chief Burke was in South Burlington, he shared that in September '23, they had six dogs that were seized from a pretty egregious environment. They've been living in a camper, very poorly cared for. Those animals were seized. During that court process. It took five months to finally come to conclusion there. And during that five month period, the city of South Burlington was charged $11,000 for the care, veterinary care and kennel care of those dogs. Again, a very limited mechanism to recoup those funds. So when this committee is considering the additions to our animal cruelty statutes, the additions of a cost of care, that's pretty intriguing to me as a former police chief, someone that was entrusted with managing a budget, managing taxpayer dollars. This transfers that burden of expense back to the person responsible. If someone, is abusing, neglecting their animals, they they have taken those animals in. They have made a commitment to those animals, and if they fail at that commitment, then they still should be expected to pay for their care or relinquishment. The cost of care that is being proposed here does allow someone if they realize that they've made a mistake, they're over their head, they do have the opportunity to forfeit those animals. But should they wish to exert their due process rights and they should wish to challenge that, and the proposal here does speak to reasonable costs. So there is some mechanism there to, I think, assess. The court can assess, is this reasonable? Somebody is not going to be charged an exorbitant rate for their dog to go to doggy daycare. It's going to meet the basic needs of the animal. So I think that that provides us some real common sense mechanisms here in Vermont. I do know that it exists in many other states. I think it's been very productive and very helpful. And I believe it was representative Rachelson, and I had the opportunity to jog my memory a little bit. I believe you asked the question of, do we ask citizens to pay for anything else when it's removed from their custody? As a child abuse investigator, I would love that people who lose their children have to pay for their care, but we know we don't do that. But we do have a robust, a too robust probably state budget at the Agency of Human Services that is entrusted with the care and housing of children who have been taken in. I did find, and only from memory, but I did find one instance where we do require people to pay when law enforcement seizes their property, and that's in our it's not so new anymore, but in our firearm seizure law. When we order that firearms are seized from folks through court order, they have to pay to store those firearms. So there is some precedent here to to have citizens pay for the storage of their property, the care for their property while a process plays out. And with that, I will be unexpectedly brief, I think. I'm not known for brevity other than to again certainly thank the committee for an invitation. I'm available obviously today or at any time if something comes up, and this is a bit of a passion of mine, and I do really appreciate and support your consideration of the changes in law.

[Speaker 0]: Any questions?

[Rep. Angela Arsenault]: Thank you. You, Mr. Whipple. I'm wondering if you would say that the provision, the new provision, the adding of, is it I don't know, whatever, G, possesses films or distributes visual images of sexual conduct with an animal, that addition, that it wasn't carried over into the aggravated cruelty section. Would you recommend that be carried over with the addition of the language in the presence of a minor or in which the minor participates?

[Trevor Whipple (Former Police Chief, Barre and South Burlington)]: Yeah. I think when we look at I'm assuming the intent here was that we wanted to send a message here in Vermont that if you're perpetrating these crimes, either having children perpetrate them or having children watch them take place, that we wanna hold people accountable to a much higher level. And my short here's where I'm not known for brevity. The short answer is yes. I certainly would, support taking letter g from page five in the misdemeanor section for general recording of or distributing visual images. I would support if that involves children or they're distributed or shown to children, I certainly would support moving that down to the aggravated section or adding this clause to the aggravated section when it involves children, making it a felony.

[Rep. Angela Arsenault]: Thank you. That's helpful. I just wanted to get a witness on the record saying that. So thank you. Oh, one more question about and this is sort of for any witness, really. But the question that was raised on page eight, do you think it reasonable to, line 13, to maintain this exception for livestock or poultry you know, not being subject to forfeiture?

[Trevor Whipple (Former Police Chief, Barre and South Burlington)]: I think that for me, I would have to assess the circumstances.

[Rep. Kenneth Goslant (Clerk)]: I

[Trevor Whipple (Former Police Chief, Barre and South Burlington)]: can't speak for what happened has happened before. I'm guessing that there was maybe concerns here for people where this is their livelihood, this is their business, and that they didn't want to completely remove all means of them providing for themselves and their family. I do think that maybe there's an option there for the court to consider it. I don't know that it should be a mandatory situation. Someone may treat, you know, their dog or their cat very differently than they do their their dairy herd.

[Rep. Angela Arsenault]: Okay, thank you.

[Speaker 0]: Any other questions? Thank you, chief, and it's great to see you again. And if you haven't already, if you could send your written testimony to Nate Buscotti, that would be great.

[Trevor Whipple (Former Police Chief, Barre and South Burlington)]: Will do. Yes. Thank you, sir.

[Speaker 0]: And also, Renee, if you're still I think you're still there. I don't think I asked you to if you haven't already, to send your testimony to Nate Buscotti also. Thank you. Okay. Next up, we have Joanne Bordeaux Borbeau, e Northeastern regional director, humane world for animals.

[Joanne Bourbeau (Northeastern Regional Director, Humane World for Animals)]: Do I give these to Nate or just I pass them around. Have We'll

[Speaker 0]: get him a copy.

[Joanne Bourbeau (Northeastern Regional Director, Humane World for Animals)]: Copy for him. He's got the electronic copies as well.

[Rep. Kenneth Goslant (Clerk)]: Okay. Then that's that's perfect.

[Joanne Bourbeau (Northeastern Regional Director, Humane World for Animals)]: And, chairman, if I might, I have my cohort, China with on Zoom. So I thought it would be more efficient if we testified together. Absolutely. I'm gonna give the Vermont perspective, and Anne comes from the national perspective. She's direct. I'll let her introduce herself as well. But my name is Joanne Borbo. I'm the Northeastern Regional Director for Humane World for Animals. You may remember formerly the Humane Society of the United States. I was a lobbyist in this building for many, many years and was involved in the drafting of a lot of the laws that we're talking about today. I live in Whitingham, Vermont, and have lived and worked in this capacity for a little over thirty years. And I'll let Anne introduce herself.

[Anne Chenoweth (Director, Animal Cruelty & Fighting Campaign, Humane World for Animals)]: Hi, everyone. My name is Anne Chenoweth. Of course, I'm a colleague of Joanne's. And I've worked for Humane World for Animals for over twenty five years. And I'm glad to be here today. I think what I can add hopefully to what Joanne will be saying in support of this animal welfare law is my national perspective on specifically, somewhat on all the issues in the bill, but specifically on cost of animal care. So I think it was asked earlier if that's bond and forfeiture. The model that we have across animal care is bond and forfeiture. So hopefully I can answer any questions you have from a national perspective on that part of the legislation.

[Speaker 0]: Great, thank you.

[Joanne Bourbeau (Northeastern Regional Director, Humane World for Animals)]: So as part of my position with Humane World, I'm also a regular instructor of animal cruelty investigations at the Vermont Police Academy. Last fall, we were glad to host a training requested by VACA on animal cruelty investigations for animal control officers. You may recall the the bill that the law that the legislature passed last year removed shelters and animal control officers as having enforcement authority under the statute. So the the training was really focused on how animal control officers can work in partnership with law enforcement and provide the resources needed to conduct these cases. We strongly support this bill. It fills it fills a very critical gap in our system right now. You've heard testimony about the fact that there is simply nowhere for animals to go. I have worked with law enforcement, local law enforcement. I've worked with sheriff's offices, state police, game wardens on a multitude of cases here in Vermont over the years, and I have never seen it to this point where we literally have no place for animals to go. Law enforcement officers will often call me and say, yeah, where am I going to bring these six dogs? And I I have no solutions for them. So I'm very happy to see and thank representative Krasnow for introducing this bill. Even though we have we don't have investigatory powers here in Vermont too. Wanna make that clear that I'm not a humane officer. We work in concert with law enforcement and provide resources. We've been on the ground. I don't know anybody remembers the 2011 Bakersfield case in which we seized over 60 Labradors from a puppy mill up in Bakersfield and had to house them for six weeks. We've worked on several other cases where, the Eden case where 90 dogs were taken out of a home. And these cases put a huge financial strain on law enforcement, on municipality, on the animal caregivers who are tasked with taking care of them for an indefinite period of time with no promise of financial reimbursement. And of course, that's not why the animal care community does this. It's not a making money kind of game. But to be able to recoup their costs is very essential to be able to have them as a partner in these cases. This bill, specifically, there's some sections I just want to point out. It established that I think really make this a fantastic bill. It establishes a legal process where an agency caring for the animal can actually request the judge, actually require the defendant to post a bond to cover the cost of care. So it expands that list to not just prosecutors. If the defendant fails to pay, the animals are forfeited and can be placed for adoption, which reduces long term shelter costs and speeds up placement into new homes. It also includes due process protections. Owners receive notice of a hearing on reasonable care costs and seizure legality. They can challenge both. And the agency seeking a bond must prove the legality of the seizure and the reasonableness of the costs. So states that have enacted bond and forfeiture laws, and I have a map in your packet that just has a visual of what other states are doing in this realm of cost of animal care. And as you can see, there's only five states that have no cost of animal care law in our country. And Vermont is listed as one with a less effective cost of animal care law because we only have a civil forfeiture proceeding. When I first started here thirty something years ago, there was a provision to, I think it was a dollar a day per animal for thirty days, they had to post a bond. And those cases were getting waived because the people were in a jail. It was not a very well written law and it wasn't implemented or used correctly. So we switched to the civil forfeiture. But as Trevor said, this is just another tool in a tool belt for human agents to be able to deal with these cases, which costly, they're emotional, they're complicated, and it really does take an all hands on deck approach. One amendment that I did notice in and I'll let Anne speak more to the cost of care map if you have questions about that. The is that the hearing the language on page 17 lines seven through nine says the hearing shall be conducted as promptly as possible after the court's receipt of the return of service process. We recognize that there are challenges to mandating hearing timelines to the judiciary, but this language is simply too vague and could allow abused animals to language in a shelter environment, frustrating the very purpose of the law. So I offered some alternative language here. I don't have to read it to you. I've got it in my written testimony where we actually recommend a certain period of time. And this sentence time limits under the section shall not be construed as jurisdictional, that sentence is actually in the civil forfeiture law, which also requires a hearing within twenty one days. So the expediency, the urgency of these issues really requires an expedient response. So we just recommend moving that line into the cost of animal care section, which would give the judiciary a little bit more flexibility in terms of when these cases are heard and what doing on the back end. And the other suggestion for amendment was just that under the forfeiture section, that's on page eight, lines 19 through 29, and again on page nine, that we add cohabitate with to the list of prohibited future rights. Because these owners will oftentimes just give the animals to their sister or their brother or their roommate, and it's just another loophole that we want to make sure that we address. We're also extremely supportive of making the crime of animal sexual abuse a felony, especially with regard to with minor. I've attached some studies which will maybe haunt you if you read them all, they're good information about the state of animal sexual abuse in our world right now. But according to the American Academy of Psychiatry and Law, the number of beast daily related arrests has risen by nearly eight hundred percent since 2000, which I thought was a extremely sobering statistic. I did work on the animal sexual abuse bill. Senator Dick Sears was a sponsor of that bill and the champion. I have to admit, I had a really hard time finding a sponsor for that bill. I don't think anybody wanted the stigma of sponsoring the bill, and Dick didn't care. He just wanted to help animals. So in 2017, we passed the existing law that you see in the testimony. I would also be supportive of moving any crime that happens in front of a child as a felony, which would mirror federal law when it comes to animal fighting cases. So animal fighting cases that are done in the presence of a minor are also a felony at the federal level. Yeah.

[Rep. Kenneth Goslant (Clerk)]: Just how many cases was that?

[Joanne Bourbeau (Northeastern Regional Director, Humane World for Animals)]: I have the studies attached in my testimony. So if you want to, I have to take a look take a look at where I pulled that from, but all of the references, the citations are are here in my

[Rep. Kenneth Goslant (Clerk)]: Now it's nationwide. Right? Yes. And the the other thing, just backing up a little but I question before the five year thing. Yeah. And you touched on a little bit of switching things to families and stuff like that, but what do you think about the five years?

[Joanne Bourbeau (Northeastern Regional Director, Humane World for Animals)]: I mean, we would definitely be supportive of increasing that time limit. What is really problematic is there are cases where abusers are either they're not fit to stand trial. Think of the Ian case specifically, where Girl Merchant was she was determined not fit to stand trial. So she was never convicted, which means there was never a mandatory psychological evaluation or those things that needed to happen. I think she did actually get evaluation, but it mandated by the court. But we would definitely be supportive of increasing those timelines.

[Rep. Kenneth Goslant (Clerk)]: So the other thing that keeps coming back to me on past cases for this stuff is is when the animals are seized usually like testimony has already been said that they may or may not be able to get the animals back. A lot of times they just go and say they can't afford them or or what is really used a lot in since I I I believe they get away with it a lot. It appears their malnutrition, they're not, but they are. How does that happen? And then on the other side, going back to the thing, when they say they can't afford them, but yet, like the Northfield case that I referenced before, and then they went to Williamstown and all that stuff, I think they went somewhere else after Williamstown.

[Joanne Bourbeau (Northeastern Regional Director, Humane World for Animals)]: I worked on that case, so it was very challenging. Yep.

[Rep. Kenneth Goslant (Clerk)]: How does that happen?

[Joanne Bourbeau (Northeastern Regional Director, Humane World for Animals)]: I wish I knew. So if you can just clarify your question for me. So are you guess I'm just not So really understanding my we both know about

[Rep. Kenneth Goslant (Clerk)]: the North Europe case. Right. That came before us, Right? And they said that they they they're out in the cold. They were like no shelter, no anything. And then they put blankets over them if I'm not mistaken. Then I think one or two of the horses, feel eight, nine, 11 something like that. Yeah. They said malnutrition. Now I drove up by there and they certainly looked it to me. And and then I think some some people came along and said, oh, no. That was the way the horse is supposed to look and all this, which is all ribs and all this stuff. And it's like, come on.

[Joanne Bourbeau (Northeastern Regional Director, Humane World for Animals)]: I know. That case, I I don't know that I would use that as an example because I I think that was the same case where the prosecutor in that case, the assistant state's attorney, was relieved of duty, and there were several other cases that he was involved with. She was allowed to sell some of those horses, which I have never seen an animal cruelty case, and keep proceeds. Think she was required to The Vermont Humane Federation actually took possession of several We removed the horses from the property, And I think she may have even gotten some of those horses back, like you mentioned. So I can't speak to how sometimes cases just go, we have processes in place to guardrails to hopefully that doesn't happen. But, you know, when the case is thrown out, and as Renee testified as well, sometimes animals go back to their abusers, which is, you know, obviously not the outcome that we want.

[Rep. Kenneth Goslant (Clerk)]: It was actually unfair for me to bring that up to you. Apologize for that because we not only have that on animals, we have that on a lot of other things too.

[Joanne Bourbeau (Northeastern Regional Director, Humane World for Animals)]: And the statistic I pulled was from this animal sex abuse information and resources page that I provided. So that's where that Okay. I find a citation for that.

[Rep. Kenneth Goslant (Clerk)]: In in that case there, she got reimbursement or something back for for selling up the

[Joanne Bourbeau (Northeastern Regional Director, Humane World for Animals)]: She was allowed to sell the horses and keep the proceeds.

[Rep. Kenneth Goslant (Clerk)]: And did she pay for the upkeep while the It's a

[Joanne Bourbeau (Northeastern Regional Director, Humane World for Animals)]: good question. I don't recall. I I recall that the Vermont Humane Federation member agencies several of took horses, and they covered those those costs. And the Vermont Humane Federation repaid them with money that we had we had raised through fundraising to try to raise money for the case. But I don't recall what the what the reimbursement was, if any, from the state.

[Rep. Kenneth Goslant (Clerk)]: So it's mostly like a rescue shelters and all that stuff, but it's all animals and stuff like that. Usually it's

[Joanne Bourbeau (Northeastern Regional Director, Humane World for Animals)]: Right. I think we used Spring Hill Horse Rescue. There were some horse rescues. Dorset equine, I don't think was even even in existence back then. I mean, they may have been, but they weren't a big presence. Spring Hill Horse Rescue that was involved in that case. Lucy McKenzie Humane Society had horses there. We lost one of her horses. I was I was there with the horse when when she when she died. So.

[Rep. Kenneth Goslant (Clerk)]: Starvation?

[Joanne Bourbeau (Northeastern Regional Director, Humane World for Animals)]: Okay. That's assumption. He did not have any props either.

[Rep. Kenneth Goslant (Clerk)]: Okay.

[Joanne Bourbeau (Northeastern Regional Director, Humane World for Animals)]: Okay, so I'm on hot seat now. No.

[Speaker 0]: How fat is it generally easier you think if the animals are given up early on, it's beneficial? I mean, does it take a long time to rehome the animals? Have you just tried

[Joanne Bourbeau (Northeastern Regional Director, Humane World for Animals)]: to Yeah, mean, depends on the situation and voluntary relinquishment is an option. It's spelled out in a statute as well as strongly encouraged. Humane World has a law enforcement manual that we provide to when we go to the police academy, so everybody who graduates, every cadet, full time, part time, post basic, get a copy of that manual. There are sample forms in there. And one of them is a voluntary relinquishment form. What we don't recommend is that you make a trade and say, hey, if you relinquish the animals, we'll drop charges.

[Speaker 0]: Well, was gonna be my other question is, you know, the voluntary relinquishment, is there a formal way of doing it so that they're they're not saying it's not an admission of guilt, but it doesn't abolve you from any prosecution?

[Joanne Bourbeau (Northeastern Regional Director, Humane World for Animals)]: Right. I mean, I think just there's nothing in the statute that that says that it's, that we can't charge them if they really understand us.

[Rep. Kenneth Goslant (Clerk)]: Go ahead. Rutland, I'm done. Yes, and

[Unidentified Committee Member]: I apologize, I stepped out of the room, so maybe this was covered. I heard you share that it can be hard to find placements for animals that are, taken into custody. What happens in those cases? I'm assuming somebody doesn't

[Joanne Bourbeau (Northeastern Regional Director, Humane World for Animals)]: like or I mean, it's my understanding, and I I give kudos to Renee and Heather for really for and the vermantas against cruelty to animals. Many times, they're looking for private citizens and animal control officers and boarding facilities. So I have concerns about chain of evidence, know, when animals are seized, I have concerns with those animals are mandated by the court to go back as putting somebody in that situation of having to return those animals. So there are serious concerns about that. In the past, the Vermont Humane Federation and the member agencies and bricks and mortar shelters across the state have stepped up, they still do occasionally, but certainly not to the extent that we used to, because they would get animals, they'd be in legal limbo for forever. There's no idea when the case is going to be adjudicated and no promise of any kind of reimbursement. In the meantime, those animals are taking space in the shelter away from animals who need to be adopted and who are in the community who need help. So it's a really impossible situation. I think if we were to pass a cost of animal care law, it would be more encouraging for shelters to help in these cases if they knew that there was a shorter timeline, that they would not have to hold them indefinitely. And it's always their first question. Were the animal seized?

[Unidentified Committee Member]: Were they voluntarily surrendered? What's the situation? Because that's going to inform how they're able to help, unfortunately. I'm curious with that. I appreciate that's helpful to know. But is there anything that when an animal is seized, like anything that should we have guardrails of the type of organization that gets control of the animal? Or should we say it's not just general citizen? I mean, I'm assuming it can work out great. But in those cases, there could be somebody who could get it and maybe isn't treating the animal any better and then getting paid now for it.

[Joanne Bourbeau (Northeastern Regional Director, Humane World for Animals)]: Right, exactly. So I can speak to humane world for animals. When we are involved in a case, we have a very clear memorandum of understanding with the law enforcement agency that we're working with. So in the Bakersfield case, again, in Franklin County, we did a horse case in St. Albans a couple of years ago. And it outlines that we will be responsible. We'll take care of the animals. We'll cover the cost of their care. We also do fundraise to be able to cover when covers it the cost, But it helps. So I think there needs to be a very clear understanding, not just here, take this dog or three dogs and good luck. What if that person is hurt? Who's liable? Is the police agency liable for that dog bite? Is the owner liable? I don't know. So there are a lot of liability concerns. And speaking of liability concerns, I do want to say that there are liability protections for animal shelters and for veterinarians who get involved in these cases. Those provisions were added. The veterinary provision liability was, I think, in 2000 and the shelter one was more recent. But there is some liability protection if they assist law enforcement in a case. I think on the Northfield case and others, shelters have been threatened to be sued. People will show up because it's in the news that horses are at the doors of equine rescue or at the main SPCA or wherever they end up going. And people will actually go, they'll visit their local animal shelter and demand to know where the animals are. So there are a lot of concerns. Would love to see I know that Lisa Milot with the Division of Animal Welfare is going to be releasing her report with a lot more ideas on how we can handle some of these complicated issues. But this is really a critical, important cost of animal care, I think, is one of the biggest white elephants in the room for law enforcement and their ability to actually work on these cases.

[Unidentified Committee Member]: And I guess I'm just thinking, is there pieces, because maybe there is an 11, I just haven't called, of the types of organizations that can collect the payment and making it clear that you have to meet circumstances. Because if you're getting the benefit of getting payment for the care, we wanna make sure you are providing a minimal level of care. And I don't think that that is spelled out

[Joanne Bourbeau (Northeastern Regional Director, Humane World for Animals)]: fully in that. We certainly would have no objections to spelling that out. Don't think it sounds like a reasonable request to me. And in the very few cases where we have gotten reimbursement, we've just kept receipts from in the Franklin County horse case I mentioned, Dorset Equine had folks on the ground. They took the horses. It was also a herd of sheep that they ended up taking, and they provided those receipts. And then we worked with the prosecutor to figure out what the cost of care reimbursement would be. And then I also want to mention that the available animal cruelty prevention programs do not exist here in Vermont that I'm aware of. There are some online options. The case that Renee mentioned, I had researched and found a couple of online trainings you can take. And I don't know anything more about them, but that can be a little challenging when that's ordered by the court and there's nowhere to send people. Let's see. I don't know that there's anything else more that I need to say about. You've got my testimony on animal sexual abuse. It was question about artificial insemination. I think Eric was right on the exception and the thing that says, without a bona fide veterinary animal husbandry purpose, that was added when we created that to address that. And there's also a provision in the statute that says that if you are working on a livestock, so any case involving livestock, and that includes horses, they have to consult with the agency of agriculture before any enforcement action is taken. So they'd have to show them, listen, this happened. And if the department determines that they were artificially inseminating their cow, then that was an example could be exemption to that. But there are some provisions in the statute that exempt those acceptable animal husbandry practices that already exist out there. And I went to I went to University of New Hampshire in an animal science program. So I know what's what it's like to have my arm, like, up to here in a house. So it's that's not what we're talking about here.

[Rep. Kenneth Goslant (Clerk)]: Okay. Thank you. Just the other thing I I really wanna bring up whether you're rescuing a pet or the pet is rescuing you. It seems like to me in Vermont, when you go through that process, which I've been through, it seems like it takes if you want to go through the rescue societies, not picking on much, it's just a question for other people that are going through this. It's like you can't get what you you can't get your match, what's going on or what the family wants and what animal you want, say a dog. But yet, we're having as I understand it, there's van loads of dogs coming from other states. Do you know how that works and why that works like that?

[Joanne Bourbeau (Northeastern Regional Director, Humane World for Animals)]: I do. I mean, that's a whole other issue. It was actually a provision in 06/26, which created Lisa Milot's position, Division of Animal Welfare, concerning regulations for people importing animals into Vermont, as well as regulations for existing animal shelters and rescues. There is no enforcement agency that is doing annual inspections or biannual inspections or any inspections of our state's animal shelters and rescue organizations, which is a very big concern for us and for the Vermont Humane Federation. One of the things we'd like to work with Lisa on are and these are they're complicated, but we can draw from other states and drafting regulations that would create things like quarantine protocols for animals coming in from other parts of the state. I mean, problem is that a lot of this is happening underground. If somebody adopts an animal online, sight unseen, meets at the Walmart to get their dog, and good luck and never to be seen again. So what's happening is the state's animal shelters where those people are bringing those dogs to live in their community, if there's any kind of issue, physical issue or behavioral issue, then they're stuck with dealing. So they were going to bring them back to the shelter, not where they got them from these underground organizations that are bringing animals into Vermont. So you have sort of the illicit trade of animals coming into Vermont. And then you have shelters who working in partnership with shelters in other parts of the country where they're formalized, they're bringing animals into the shelter, they're quarantined, they're vetted, they're spayed and neutered. The shelter is there as a backup in case something happens with the animal. So there's proper way to do it and an improper way to do it. But we need to be regulating how animals come into the state. A lot of the diseases that we're seeing, like heartworm that was more prevalent in other parts of the country, might be coming to Vermont, for example. But also, we need to start regulating our shelters and rescues as well.

[Speaker 0]: Some of the other states have addressed what representative Goslant brought up.

[Joanne Bourbeau (Northeastern Regional Director, Humane World for Animals)]: Yes. Most of the New England states have very strict Massachusetts is one of the most strict quarantine protocols for incoming animals. Vermont does not have any kind of protocols other than the animal has to have a rabies vaccination if it's old enough and a health certificate.

[Speaker 0]: And this is something you folks are working on?

[Joanne Bourbeau (Northeastern Regional Director, Humane World for Animals)]: It was yes. We'd like to see I think that representative Shea Waters Evans has a bill in house government ops that might address that. Maybe not this year, but it's something that is on the map to address as soon as we possibly can. The problem is the so the agency of agriculture used to enforce that statute and do the inspections. And they were removed as an enforcement authority at their request in a an agricultural like, you know, one of their miscellaneous bills. So we weren't even aware it was happening until it was a done deal. So now

[Speaker 0]: hop into the into the weeds. Be revealed on this.

[Rep. Kenneth Goslant (Clerk)]: Right. Right.

[Joanne Bourbeau (Northeastern Regional Director, Humane World for Animals)]: Okay. But it is a it is a serious issue, and you're definitely right to Absolutely. Work it out.

[Rep. Kenneth Goslant (Clerk)]: I'm just sure everybody that's still on the screen and probably in in in the room. I just know that we searched and searched and searched locally, New England, Pennsylvania, Puppy Mill City apparently down there with funny nationality or

[Joanne Bourbeau (Northeastern Regional Director, Humane World for Animals)]: I know what you mean.

[Rep. Kenneth Goslant (Clerk)]: I'll walk generally on that. New York and all that stuff, we were looking for a dog that was a lot like what we unexpectedly lost. And I tried and tried and tried and, you know, pretty good family and without this provided a pretty good life and all that stuff. And to make a long story short, we ended up rescuing this dog or this dog rescuing us. It's it's worked out very well. Mhmm. From Fort Lauderdale, Florida. Flew down to get her and bring her back and went through the proper stuff. But I tried and tried and tried and representative Rachelson was was around me quite a bit on this and she knew how emotional I was on it. And it like it took it took well over thirty thirty to thirty maybe longer than that. And honestly, was also fighting the demons that do I really wanna go through another. Mhmm. But the point of the matter is is to go and get a dog that was out there that's legit on, I forget the dog sites and the The finder. The pet finder name. To go through that, to actually talk to the people that have the dogs and the rescue stuff and all this stuff, it's like, mean, I might be exaggerating a little bit, but they almost like then I'm sure there's a lot of bad actors out there, but it's like they almost treat you immediately like, well, you're we're not even gonna bother with you and you fill out paperwork, paperwork, paperwork, and all this stuff. You submitted all this up. You don't even get a phone call, but yet they want money, they want this, they want this and all this stuff. And they have all these dogs, but you don't get them.

[Joanne Bourbeau (Northeastern Regional Director, Humane World for Animals)]: Right. And that's another reason why Vermont shelters work in partnership with these rescue groups in other parts of the country, because we've done such a great job of spaying and neutering our animals. We don't always have puppies or well, plenty of kittens, but puppies are rare, small dogs are rare, a lot of big dogs here in the Northeast. But that's not always the dog people want. And we also encourage people to start with their humane society, because if they can't find the dog they want, to look to a responsible breeder who knows what they're doing and is doing it responsibly.

[Rep. Kenneth Goslant (Clerk)]: You need less and less of those too. Yeah. Thank you. You. Congrats. So

[Anne Chenoweth (Director, Animal Cruelty & Fighting Campaign, Humane World for Animals)]: I think

[Joanne Bourbeau (Northeastern Regional Director, Humane World for Animals)]: that concludes my testimony. So Okay. There's a question.

[Speaker 0]: Instead of Arsenault?

[Rep. Angela Arsenault]: Last question, I want to make sure that I understood you correctly about on page two, when you mentioned, are we talking about like, artificial insemination, proper artificial insemination or something else? So are you saying that we should add that clause without a bona fide veterinary or animal husbandry purpose to D on line 11? Or are you saying we've got it covered?

[Joanne Bourbeau (Northeastern Regional Director, Humane World for Animals)]: No, I'm just saying that the statute currently provides an exemption for a bonafide animal husbandry practices, which I believe that insemination will fall under.

[Rep. Angela Arsenault]: Right.

[Joanne Bourbeau (Northeastern Regional Director, Humane World for Animals)]: So I was just

[Rep. Angela Arsenault]: So D is we're talking

[Joanne Bourbeau (Northeastern Regional Director, Humane World for Animals)]: about something totally different, obviously, but yes. Right. So the it's the the bonafide animal has has been repurposed as the key language. Yes. Yeah. So so you're saying

[Rep. Angela Arsenault]: it exists already or we should

[Joanne Bourbeau (Northeastern Regional Director, Humane World for Animals)]: It exists already. So b is existing language,

[Rep. Angela Arsenault]: and c is new. Right. So I'm just saying to d, where it

[Joanne Bourbeau (Northeastern Regional Director, Humane World for Animals)]: would have It was left out. Oh, I see. Well, I don't know that there would be a bona fide animal has a purpose to transmit semen by person. But you're right. They would have a Inal Yeah. For yeah. For eyed fish insemination. I don't know. I would I would point to legislative council and see if if they if that would address your concern. I'm I'm I'm not 100% certain. Okay. Thank you.

[Speaker 0]: Said you're all set with your testimony, Joanne.

[Rep. Kenneth Goslant (Clerk)]: I'm

[Speaker 0]: assuming that you have more to add since you guys were up together.

[Anne Chenoweth (Director, Animal Cruelty & Fighting Campaign, Humane World for Animals)]: Yeah, we're together. Yeah, of course, again, just to say, I work for Humane World for Animals. I'm the director of our animal cruelty and fighting campaign. So our campaign works on approving dogfighting cruelty laws across the country. And I just wanna reiterate the point that those laws become relatively useless if you can't afford to enforce them, if law enforcement can't afford to use them. So that's why these laws are so important. And I'll just, in terms of like just looking at this big picture, then I'll just be able for, you can ask me questions, because I think Joanne really hit everything on the head. It was expressed by other witnesses, I just want to put, you know, really emphasize this point, that restitution is not a solution, right? Because we just find that defendants don't either pay their restitutions, don't pay enough of it, and it's just not a good solution. It can take so long that it's not a solution that would make the parties whole for caring for animals. The other point I would make, I think Joanne made this point, but I just wanna emphasize it. In working across the country, majority of states have good cost of care laws. A lot of times legislators or other stakeholders will see that groups are fundraising off cruelty cases. Shouldn't that fill the hole for the money that they're spending? It never does. I mean, we've had years of experience. I also overs oversaw our rescue team, Humane World for Animals Rescue team for years. And I can't think of a case where restitution was paid other than a portion that was over time. So I wanna make those two points about, again, why this bond and forfeiture cost of animal care legislation is so important to our organization and to agencies across the country that do this good work. And the other big sort of big picture things I wanna make this, two of the main concerns I've heard about this current civil forfeiture law in Vermont is that the process can take so long and that it's basically the prosecutor making a case twice, right? Like first the civil hearing and then later in the criminal case. I think our legislation that we're proposing, which is in addition to current law, as you all know, will help speed up the process because not only would a prosecutor be able to bring the foul petition for cost of care, but also the agency caring for the animal, right? So they have a much higher motivation to get this hearing going, right? Because they're like, wait, we're spending a lot of money. We need to get this going. And then during the process itself, it's a preponderance of the evidence standard. So obviously that helps start the petition process with a caretaker being able to make the case without the level of a criminal case, right? Not beyond a reasonable doubt. And also with the original law, you have to prove each animal that was seized suffered from abuse. In the new law, the cost of animal care law, you only have to prove that the warrant was valid and that the costs are reasonable. So, it helps speed up the trial because there's less of a case to put forward. And you also, you're not repeating what you would need to do in the criminal case. Anyway, so I think there are two good solutions to those two issues. We see this legislation as working across the country, right? We see it in action, enables us to respond to cruelty cases in states that have this have this law. So anyway, so I hope that all makes sense. And if you have any questions, I would love

[Joanne Bourbeau (Northeastern Regional Director, Humane World for Animals)]: to answer them. Any questions?

[Rep. Kenneth Goslant (Clerk)]: Thank

[Unidentified Committee Member]: you. So I'm wondering,

[Rep. Barbara Rachelson]: since you work with so many different states, if you're aware of evidence based programs for people who are animal abusers?

[Anne Chenoweth (Director, Animal Cruelty & Fighting Campaign, Humane World for Animals)]: Yeah, I heard this. It's very challenging because, you know, all regarding money, right? Like, who's providing that? So, you mean psychological therapy?

[Rep. Barbara Rachelson]: Right. It sounds like having a specialized evaluation is key to the treatment. And I know there are huge links between animal abuse and domestic violence. And so, again, I'm just wondering if you can point us to a state that has been taking it seriously about how to rehabilitate or provide treatment to people who have been convicted.

[Anne Chenoweth (Director, Animal Cruelty & Fighting Campaign, Humane World for Animals)]: So, I hate answer it this way, but no. I think, obviously, we support that part legislation of that does look towards the rehabilitation and sort of these issues that come up, psychological therapy, but I just haven't seen it. And I think we support it, I think one of the reasons it might not be narrowed down to cruelty issues is that already it's hard enough to find a training program just on anger issues or violence issues that really narrow it down to animals. I mean, Joanne could speak more to what Vermont has, but I haven't seen it. I'm sorry to say it all has to do with money, right?

[Joanne Bourbeau (Northeastern Regional Director, Humane World for Animals)]: Animal hoarding is, I mean, recidivism rate animal hoarding is about one hundred percent. So those aren't really good odds, unfortunately. They do very specialized.

[Rep. Barbara Rachelson]: And it looks like cognitive behavioral therapy is sort of what's Yeah.

[Joanne Bourbeau (Northeastern Regional Director, Humane World for Animals)]: I mean, there are some programs geared hoarding, hoarding specifically, and animal hoarding, but yeah, as Ann mentioned there, do you want bar between?

[Speaker 0]: I'm sorry, Barbara.

[Rep. Barbara Rachelson]: I was gonna say, I get that. We need to solve the problem of where these animals are going and keeping them safe. And I'm always trying to think about how can we keep people from doing that in the first place. Can we break cycles of this happening? So thank you. It's hard work that you do, and I'm grateful you both have years and years of dedication.

[Joanne Bourbeau (Northeastern Regional Director, Humane World for Animals)]: Some cases are harder than others, that's for sure. But we have a great network here in Vermont of private and public sector and law enforcement. I do believe that if we put our heads together, we can make it better. So I thank you for your attention to this bill and hopefully. Great.

[Speaker 0]: And and thank you and and thank you to all our witnesses. Hope it gives you a little peace of mind to know. Well, first off, there's gonna be, you know, a number of issues in this bill that we're gonna be looking at, but I hope it gives you peace of mind that this committee is is very good at vetting the the bills that we do and taking a a close look at things. So and I think this is gonna be a a a good bill for us to to move along eventually. We're gonna be getting done a little bit early. In my opinion, a little bit early is better than having to cut witnesses off and have them come back another day. So with that, we'll go offline, and, we'll see you tomorrow.