2021-11-17 00:00:00 - Joint Committee on Environment, Natural Resources and Agriculture
2021-11-17 00:00:00 - Joint Committee on Environment, Natural Resources and Agriculture
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
uh0 hearing today for the Joint Committee on the Environment, Natural Resources and Agriculture. It's a pleasure to be here with you today. I'm State Representative Carolyn Dykema and I will be chairing the committee today with my colleague and friend in the senate Senator Rausch who is also um with us. I'm going to give a few rules of the road to start us22 off but first I want to ask for everyone's patience today. Both the house and the Senate are informal session um so members may be coming and going is necessary to take votes but we will be sure to continue the hearing and make sure everyone has a chance to be heard. Um The topic of the hearing today is animals as well as uh a couple of miscellaneous bills. Uh and we have quite a few folks signed up to testify51 uh today so to start off with the rules of the road um as you all know we are in a virtual format now so we have a few rules just to keep things running smoothly and make sure that everyone has a chance to participate in the process. Um Hopefully just go through these quickly. Um The public has an opportunity to participate and submit testimony both orally today and if you are submitting oral testimony or presenting today, you should have received um the log in from L. I. S. We are also as a committee receiving written testimony and that testimony can be directed to the email address which is listed on the hearing notice and we do ask that while there is no specific deadline for submitting written testimony. The sooner that we can get that testimony, the more time the committee will have to review it. Um We will proceed in the order that the bills are listed on the docket today in terms of hearing um from folks testifying. So all folks testifying on a given bill will be heard together and I'll try to um prompt folks as we go along so people have some sense of um the order of testimony and so people can get ready to prepare for their remarks. We are imposing a three minute limit on testimony. We have 73 people signed up to testify today. We want to make sure that everyone has an opportunity to speak. So uh I am not trying to be discourteous if I need to gently interrupt you to145 notify you of your three minute timing and we also will um be sharing a very hopefully a very subtle chime um that will mean that your three minute time period is up. Those of you who are testifying testifying on a number of bills. There are several of you um we ask that you testify on all the legislation together. Um individuals will not be called up a second time. So all testimony today should be given within that same three minute timeframe, please do not use chat for substantive comments as it can be kept in the public record and also I know it goes without saying but if you could please mute yourself, if you're not testifying that will make sure that everyone has the ability to be heard. Um Finally191 for committee members, um those of you who wish to ask questions, please continue to use the raised hand feature and per our committee rules, only members of the committee will be allowed to ask questions today. Please note for your information this um hearing today is being taped and audio and video of the hearing will be available on the State Legislature website. All right. Um and then finally before we get into the hearing, I want to make sure to introduce our committee members on the house side before turning it over to my Senate chair. As I said, there are we are inactive roll calls right now. So I think folks will be jumping on but I know that we do have the vice chair of the committee. Representative Domb with us as well as Representative Carey So senator Rausch I will again welcome you, I believe you are with us to introduce the committee members249 from the Senate, Thank you so much. Representative Dykema Great to see you and partner with you as always. Um and good afternoon everyone and I just want to echo uh my co chairs comments about gratitude for your patients today as both chambers are in session and in fact the senate is debating mental health legislation as we speak. Um so uh Senate members may be joining us from time to time, but that that debate is273 unfolding now. Um and so we are we are uh straddling two ongoing bits of important bits of legislative work. So great to be here with you all, all of you today and and thank you again for your patience.
Okay, thank you, Senator always great to join you. So now we will move into the public testimony portion of the hearing as is customary. Um we will be taking legislators, those300 who are available out of turn, many of them have other commitments that they need to get to. Um but I do suspect we may have to take them later on in the hearing process as they join311 us but is really Ehrlich with us. Mhm Yes, I am here. I'm here. Thank you.
REP EHRLICH - HB 903 - SB 576 - Okay, thank you. Chair Dykema and chair Rausch and honorable members of the committee. I will be brief because we are both both chambers are in session. Um I come before you today in support of House Bill 903 and Senate Bill 576 an act relative to ivory and rhinoceros horn trafficking. Um for the past eight years, I have partnered with Senator Jason Lewis um to end Massachusetts surprisingly active role in the global ivory and rhinoceros horn trade um the slaughter of African elephants and rhinos is driven by demand for the ivory in elephant tusks and the substance of rhino horns which is really similar in composition to369 our fingernails. Um and some mistakenly believe that inhaling ground up rhino horn actually leads to greater virility. So that is what is driving the species to near extinction. Um, we really are at a crisis point.
Um, and although international ivory trade was supposedly banned in 1989 the great elephants census of 2016 revealed a 30% loss of African savanna elephants between 2000 and seven400 and 2014 blamed primarily on poaching. Um by 1970 rhino numbers dropped to 70,000 and today there are around 27,000 that remain in the wild. One of the absolute saddest sights is seeing the only two remaining northern white rhinos um located in the old Pejeta Conservancy in Kenya, which I'm probably mispronouncing. Um they are living under 24 hour guard. Um,430 not only to protect the two individuals, but also the whole species as hope dims that they will be able to reproduce. Um, but beyond the numbers, elephant and rhino poaching is just such an inhumane and heartbreaking um practice where445 the animals, including babies are hunted down by poachers with military grade weapons. Um, many of them have ties to terrorist organizations like Al Shabaab.
Um their tusks and horns are then harvested by sawing them literally off the faces of the animals sometimes as they are still alive. Um if I can just editorialize for a second, I have found carrying this bill for all of these years to be um just so frustrating, Sorry, I can't believe I am doing this and emotionally draining. It's just so sad. So to change Mass law, of course, the case has already been made that what happens in Massachusetts is having an adverse impact on a gravely endangered species on the other side of the planet. And that that's the challenge. Just to make the case here. Um study conducted by the International Fund for Wildlife, which is actually headquartered in Boston um ranked Boston as fourth in the country for sales of ivory that has advertised on craigslist. Um An undercover investigation511 performed by the Humane Society of the United States, found in 2017 that nearly 700 ivory items were listed for sale across Massachusetts, with the sellers unable to prove where the items came from. In a more recent undercover investigation in May 2019, the Humane Society found several elephant ivory items for sale from five sellers who could not produce age or origin verification documentation at the new Bedford Whaling museums Annual nautical antiques show.
So while while the legislation establishes penalties such as fines or jail time, there are a few exemptions, the prohibition does not apply to ivory that is a fixed component of a musical instrument if the ivory was acquired legally and weighs less than 200 g or to ivory conveyed as part of an estate upon the owner's death. Um Educational or scientific institutions are also exempt if the material was legally acquired Before January 1, 1991 and is um not transferred for577 financial gain or profit after July 1st of 2020. Um this legislation has a successful history and the legislature, including several favorable reports by the Committee and Passage in the Senate in the prior session. Similar legislation593 has also passed in at least nine States as well as Washington D. C. And um the purpose is really to fill the federal enforcement gap that does not cover interstate trade, intra state trade, um trade with in Massachusetts or within states.
Um, so in Massachusetts, we have a great coalition here of animal welfare organizations, the Humane Society, M. S. P. C. A Zoo, New England, the Animal Legal Defense Fund and the International Fund for Animal Welfare, which is IFAW um as well as the Boston Symphony Orchestra um and they're supporting our efforts to crack down on ivory and rhinoceros, horn trafficking in the commonwealth. So I strongly strongly urged the committee to follow the footsteps of other states that have already641 enacted ivory bans or wildlife trafficking regulations by issuing a favorable report on this legislation. So I thank you all, I'm happy to take questions. I thank you all for your patience and your service on this esteemed committee. Thank you.
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you rep Ehrlich and I appreciate your continued and obviously very passionate advocacy for662 for this cause. Are there any questions or comments from members of the committee Seeing none. Thank you for your testimony today. A representative I'd like to now welcome Representative Lewis Welcome.
[REP LEWIS:][HB966][HB965][SB623] Thank you and good afternoon uh again, thank you so much to the chairs and committee for taking me out of order on the state that I know both of our bodies are in session, I just want to speak briefly on to animal welfare bills before your committee today. The first H 966 an act concerning the use of animals in product testing is a refile in collaboration with Senator Montigny a bill704 that with each passing year continues to grow in bipartisan co sponsorship. This legislation would ban the use of animals in outdated and unnecessary cosmetic testing, something that's already been banned in eight states, including New Jersey just last week, where a similar ban passed with unanimous vote. A recent study found that 79% of adults in the United States are against cosmetic animal testing and with your committees help our Commonwealth could become the ninth state to ban this inhumane practice.
The second bill I wanted to talk about this before your committee today is H 965 an act prohibiting the sale of fur products. This is a campaign companion bill to senator John Velis is S 623. This legislation is co sponsored by 48 of our colleagues across every imaginable political spectrum one could conjure up Modeled after the 2019 California ban this bill would acknowledge the overwhelming evidence that fur farming is inhumane and harms our collective public health while celebrating the abundance of alternatives available. Many companies including Framingham's own TJ Maxx along with Bloomingdale's Macy's Nordstrom, Gucci Versace, Coach and many others have already transitioned away from the use and sale of for and it's time that all the businesses and our Commonwealth follow their lead Thank you again. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you rep Lewis for your testimony, appreciate it. Are there any questions or comments from members of the committee seeing none, thank you very much. I would now excuse me. Um I would now like to recognize, I believe Representative Sheila Harrington is with us. Representative Harrington are you here? Hi yes I am here. Hi Representative so you have a constituent with you I believe as well correct. I actually have to people with me, I have attorney robert cox who is here and um mr john Hills who is a constituent, they're both here. Okay, wonderful, well the floor is yours.
[REP HARRINGTON:][HB3837] Okay, thank you, Madam chair so the bill that I brought forward, house 3837 is a bill that came to the need for this bill came to my attention through a situation with my constituent John Hills. Um and I'm going to not talk very long because I know we're in a hurry and I'd rather defer my time to attorney cox867 who is very familiar with this, But essentially what happened to Mr. Hills and he will give you basically his breakdown of his timeline of how this has affected him. But he purchased a property several years ago in the town of Pepperell. Oh he himself took the initiative to get a 21E evaluation and he really did everything that was required of them. The DEP. At the end of the project basically said that there891 were no conditions and and he was all good to go. There was a subsequent review of it and again nothing then lo and behold in the last couple of years, they've come forward and standards have changed within the Department of Environmental Protection and they're actually now holding him responsible for doing testing not only on his own property but on the property of his neighbor's.
He's expended a huge amount of money and I'm going to let him go920 into it. But what this bill does is it basically clarifies um something that we actually already have in the law that is inconsistent with the Massachusetts regulation. And although my study of conflict of laws would be the statute would always trump the regulation, they're not seeing it that way. And in order to make it crystal clear, this bill will operate to amend section five C. Of chapter 21E so that there is no equivocation that if you951 have done due diligence and you have bought a property that the DOEP. Has told you as a safe piece of property. Incidentally one other factor, the um hazardous materials did not come from my client. There had previously been a dry cleaners there and that is why he did the 21E testing. So I'm gonna now if if it pleases the chairs, I'm going to ask Mr. Cox to sort of explain from his perspective the legal pitfalls of the existing law and why we needed to firm it up.
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Please Thank you.
ROBERT COX BOWDITCH & DEWEY: [HB3837] HB3837 Thank you. Representative Harrington and thank you members of the committee for allowing me to address you regarding this bill entitled an act relative to liability for release of hazardous material. I'm Bob Cox, I'm an attorney with Bowditch and Dewey Worcester And let me begin this fashion.1009 In August of 1998 Governor Cellucci then Governor Cellucci signed into law the Brownfields Act, which established at the time, new incentives to encourage parties to clean up and redevelop contaminated property in Massachusetts. The act, the Brownfields Act gave both liability relief in financial incentives to attract new investment in contaminated properties while at the same time ensuring that the Commonwealth environmental standards are met. One of the major aspects of this act was the liability relief provisions at section five C. Of chapter 21E, which is entitled exemption from liability for release of oil and hazardous material at a site for which a permanent solution or remedy operation status exists. So provides an exemption from liability. This bill, this bill before you now is to clarify the scope of that exemption under Section five C. So let me describe briefly. First, the existing law, the1071 problem and what the changes the liability relief exemption.
How does that work? Who gets the exemption exemption runs to eligible persons. It's defined by the statute as an owner or operator of a property that did not own or operate the site at the time of the release did not cause or contribute to the contamination. So that would mean you or me coming into a property fresh having nothing to do with it. That's who gets the exemption. What is the exemption exemption provides for? Shall provide for shall be exempt from liability to the Commonwealth or any other persons or contribution response action costs, property damage is on the chapter 21E or for property damages under common law for any release of oil and hazardous material owned or operated by that eligible person. When does this kick in? When does exemption apply? Where a permanent solution or remedy operation status exists and that has been provided that needs to be DOEP. Standards.
So, how does this work in practice? How does how does the statute come into play? In the real world? In the real estate world, where we're doing transactions and buyers, are concerned about buying a piece of property that may be contaminated? Well, it takes place in the due diligence levels before you get to the property based upon1153 three questions. So the first question if you're looking at a property is is this a disposal site? And that's easy to find out because DEP MASSDEP website lists them By town address. You can find them, there are about 40,000 of them. So you can find out if you have a disposal site. And by the way, once the property is a disposal site, it's always a disposal site. So you always see it there. Second. If you confirm that it's a disposal site, find out if there's been a permanent solution for that For that site. If there's not, then you have a problem because you're not going to get this section 5C exemption so you have to deal with it.
But if there is a permanent solution, the next step is1195 to determine, we're DEP standards met. And there's a quick answer there because you can look at DEPs website to see whether DEP did any type of audit of the response actions leading up to the permits permanent solution. So it's a simple process. The process should be self implementing to get the liability relief that I described before the statute. But there's a gap1218 in this practice. I heard the chime, I'll be quick uh there's a gap in this practice and you hear about this from the testimony Mr. John Hills DEP is not honoring honoring the section five C provisions or the spirit of the provision. It's finding very technical ways to keep sites open and as you hear from Mr. Hill's asking them to do more and more work second and fairness to your
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
attorney cox. My apologies. We really do need to be tight with the three minute timeframe. I apologize but we will take written testimony and I would encourage you to submit the remainder of your testimony in writing and we'll be sure to take a careful look at that. Thank you very much. Representatives there another member to testify. Representative Harrington is there another member of your panel blue? Yes, I don't know if you can hear me Okay? I can I can so Mr Hills are you testifying now? Yes, can you hear me? I can't know. Yes. Mr Hill's would be the next person to testify.
[JOHN HILLS (CONCERNED CITIZEN):][HB3837] Thanks. Good afternoon and thank you for allowing us the time to speak to you today. My name is John Hills. I'm a lifelong resident of Pepperell Mass in the spring of 2004. I entered into an agreement to purchase 79 railroad street from the Grants cleaners where I planned to build a handicap accessible condo for my aunt1312 and uncle and their handicapped son In April 2004 before I purchase property I paid Pine and Swallow environmental firm from 21E testing to see if there were any dangerous chemicals or substance on the property.1326 Test results did show dry cleaning chemicals which were reported to Mass DEP and Mrs. Grant after the testing confirmed chemicals on site pine and swallowing the grand family proceeded to a major cleanup which consisted of installing watering wells in the property demolition, existing dry cleaners, excavating and trucking out 1000 yards contaminated fill, replacing it with clean soil. The cleanup went on for almost a year.
During my visits to the site to check on the progress, I would often see a DEP. There monitoring the site. Mhm. Before I purchased the site I was assured by pine and swallowing the Mass DEP it was a clean and safe site to build on. My attorney also made sure Mass DEP didn't add any deed restrictions to the property signaling it was a safe site to build on After we would commence. It was a safe site to build on in April 2005 we purchased the property from the Grant family begin applying for all town and state permits. I received my building permit and proceeded to build a duplex. Unfortunately due to the downturn, um my aunt and uncle weren't able to buy the property but I was so confident that1390 it was safe. I moved my wife newborn son and my four year old daughter in and we proceeded to live there for years in 2009 we were living in your own street. I was contacted by mass DEP. To do1401 air quality tested. The results came1403 back with unsafe readings of dry cleaning products. Mass DEP contacted me and asked permission to commit and mitigate the problem. Mass DEP sending1411 crews and cocked all the cracks in basement floors, installed the blower fan system similar to raid on mitigation system, removed any harmful penetrating penetrating1420 air into the cellar, Mass DEP, supervised and paid for all the work Mass DEP. told me at the time I was a non responsible party.
After the work was completed, we were sure that was safe for us to live there, which we continue to do for a few more years. I'm not sure how my status has changed the1438 responsible party today when I was not considered a responsible party in 2009 when Mass DEP performed and paid for all the work. I've done nothing to change the1446 property or the grounds in anyways. In the spring of 2020, I was contacted by Mass DEP asking if they could do air quality testing testing again as I've done every time they have contacted me, I responded immediately. I was able to get them into the building even during the pandemic air quality came back with a trace of dry cleaning products which at the time I was told is below the state threshold it is considered a safe level for people to continue living there. The Mass DEP also did air quality testing across the street at eight and 10 railroad street and discovered traces of dry cleaning products1479 which was told was the local state threshold1482 they considered safe The Mass DEP contacted me and told me I was responsible to go across the street to eight and 10 railroad street to do mitigation work.
In addition I was told to install watering wells in my property at 79 railroad Street after being notified of the air quality test results, I hired on the Environmental service services environmental attorney Robert Cox from Bowditch law firm to correspond with Mass DEP under the guidance of Aluminum environmental, I removed all the tenants possession for the basement of the garage areas. On the engineer installed points of the concrete basement floors for air testing and supervised all the sealing of cracks in each basement. We move sheet rock and carpeting. It applied epoxy paint to both ceiling, floors and walls. We also install new fans of the raid on mitigation system. New air quality testing showed better results and on the engineering confirmed again that all levels1530 were safe and with the Mass DEP guidelines to continue living there. Omni engineering felt that we did everything we could to make the air quality safer Omni engineering start gauges to monitor.
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Yeah. Um We we passed the three minute threshold by by quite quite a bit of time. Could you wrap up your testimony.
[HILLS:] Thank you. Yeah, I'll stop because it's going to go1551 on longer but I just want to express I've done everything I'm supposed to do. Not only did did I not just buy the property. I did my due diligence. I'm the one that found the chemicals in the ground and paid for the 21E. Testing. We notified the grants that owned the property. We notified Mass DEP. There was a major cleanup that went on for years. They trucked out thousands and thousands of yards of fill they brought they brought in new fill um and then we checked we checked the deed restrictions Mass DEP didn't put any restrictions on the site that so I was assured it was safe and I talked to them numerous times on site and was told it was safe and then we did buy the property. I applied through the state through the federal government for all my
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
mr I'm so sorry to interrupt. Um I very much appreciate your testimony. I just want to make sure to be fair to everyone. I know this is a very clearly a very emotional topic for you and I appreciate you taking the time and mr cox attorney cox taking the time to be here today. I did um have an extensive conversation with Representative Harrington She has been in touch with my office several times about um your issue to make sure that we are aware of the situation and we will be sure to be following up with her like attorney cox. That would very much encourage you to submit any additional testimony in1628 writing. It's very helpful for the committee to have um the written testimony that way we can really sit down with it and make sure to review all the details. So um I will1637 I would encourage you1638 to to maintain contact with Representative Harrington I know she is very familiar with the process and we'll just make sure that all of your concerns are clearly documented and inserted into the record. And again, my apologies. I just want to make sure we've got a very long docket today and I want to make sure everyone has an opportunity to be heard. Are there any questions or comments from members of the committee?
[HILLS:] Can I say one More Thing. I'm sorry very quickly. Please Sure. But this is basically ruining my life for something that I never did. I never owned a dry cleaning business. I've cooperated, I've done everything right and it's I'm literally seeing psychiatrists on this. I'm on anxiety medicine, dealing with that for anxiety and depression. This has just been a nightmare for the last two years and I've1686 tried to cooperate. I've tried to do everything right and I never did anything here. I am the one who1691 brought it to their attention. I'm the one that made it clear. So the clean up would begin.
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
I just I'm very, very sorry, I will absolutely sit down with Representative Harrington and we will make sure um we will make sure that we fully understand um the circumstances around your situation and and just very sorry that you're having to go through this. It sounds very difficult. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Representative. Um next I would like to call um Senator O'Connor is the senator with us. I am thank you. Chair, Welcome Senator.
[SEN O'CONNOR:][HB384][SB230] Thank you and I appreciate the opportunity taken out of turn. I'm here to testify in support of Senate Bill 230 and House Bill 384, which is1735 an act to ban the retail sale of cats and dogs in pet shops. Today. You'll also be hearing from advocates who have been on the front lines to pass this legislation for years, Liz Maglio who was recently elected councilor in the city of Braintree as well as Tara Williams and members of the extended animal protection network and family in Massachusetts who are in support of this bill. This legislation seeks to fix a serious problem that is inherent to and deliberately hidden by the retail pet industry in Massachusetts to broad some background commercial pet shops in Massachusetts source their animals from out of state USDA licensed commercial breeding facilities. The USDA regulations that govern the standard of care and breeding for commercially retailed pets are1780 woefully inadequate.
Uh, the list of inadequate inadequacies includes the lack of veterinary care, little to no space requirements, no socialization requirements and many more that are simply unacceptable and things that we wouldn't as legislators and as citizens of Massachusetts except as standards. Some of these USDA licensed facilities are commonly known to and referred to as puppy mills. These puppies and kittens that originate from USDA licensed puppy mills are taken from their mothers at a very young age, which expose them to a range of medical and behavioral issues. These animals are then sold by breeders to brokers.
They're transported hundreds and hundreds of miles and then sold by these brokers to pet shops. During this middleman phase, diseases spread from animal to animal and the conditions are horrendous by buying from brokers instead of directly from breeders. Pet shops make it very difficult if not impossible for consumers to find out where their animals, their pet, their family member, where that came from. This lack of transparency, particularly when so many pet shop animals are sick or behaviorally challenged, is a significant consumer protection issue. The Humane society of the United States has reported that they received large volumes of the complaints from consumers who have spent thousands of dollars in veterinary bills caring for sick pets.
Pet shop animals become caught in a vicious cycle from puppy mill to broker to pet shop to a family and far too often are surrendered to municipal shelter rescue organization. By Bill Senate Bill 230 would end this vicious cycle in Massachusetts. This legislation would prohibit the retail sale of cats and dogs in pet pet shops. The bill instead encourages pet shops offer animals from shelters and rescue organizations as they are no longer making a profit off of these animals. Most citizens already adopt from shelters or buy from a network of responsible breeders. So restricting puppy sales in pet stores will still allow consumers to obtain1899 their dog of choice. Examination of federal documents in Massachusetts Department of Agricultural Resources records demonstrated that many Massachusetts pet shops1910 source their puppies from some of the largest puppy mill brokers in the country. This legislation does not mean job loss or business closure. In fact, the opposite is true.
This ban, which has taken place in California and in Maryland has shown that these stores are able to transition and bridge themselves from stores that source and sell puppy mill1930 puppies to a humane model that is thriving. The pet industry in Massachusetts is booming. Last year over $70 billion dollars was spent on food, veterinary care supplies and other services Of that figure the sale of live animals made up the smallest sector, only 2%. The sale of Puppy Mill animals has no place in Massachusetts through laws and regulations. We've made this one of the safest states for animals with some of the strongest protections for animal rights, but this remains a serious problem that needs to be addressed and we need to address it. Now. I thank you for your consideration and respectfully ask a favorable report from the committee. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you senator appreciate your time today. I know that on the House side Representative Higgins has also filed the companion piece and I know we've got a lot of testimony that we'll hear from um folks today on that bill so appreciate your time today. Are there any questions or comments from members of the committee? Seeing none. Thank you very much. Thank you. I will now call Representative Driscoll Representative Welcome.
[REP DRISCOLL:][HB888] Thank1995 you Chair Dykema Uh Thank you to members of the committee. Uh for The opportunity to testify on H. 888 H. Triple eight um an act um regarding not uh population control.2013 Nonlethal population control for overpopulated um animals on state owned land. So this is this relates particularly to a interest in my district, in the surrounding areas in the Blue Hills reservation. And uh to refile I'll submit written testimony with uh more details but I'd really like to have the committee look at2040 this. Um It would end the practice of uh killing the animals if there is an overpopulation that's found to be hurting the ecosystem of the state forest and replace it with couple things mechanism to actually track animal population. So the idea would be to tranquilize the animal, put them with the tracking device and basically perform uh contraceptive measures so that the animal population can kind of stay neutral and not grow uh to overpopulate in the future. So um the hunts have gone on for the last uh five years in the Blue Hills to reduce a population there. And uh in the regards to reducing population that's been successful. Um
One of the other things that I will mention my written testimony is looking at this again with fresh eyes this session uh I really think that kind of a floor uh needs to be set as well in terms of what regulation there should be around what's considered a safe and the target population for white tailed deer for2107 instance in Massachusetts state forest. I can tell you that uh a part of the2112 areas that are hunted in the Blue Hills, there are several zones, they break up the map into several zones for the purpose of coordinating the controlled Hunt over the course of November. And several of the zones are actually the threshold below within the acceptable threshold of anywhere between 6 to 18 deer In a square miles considered healthy. So we actually have several of the zones that are going to be hunted right now as we speak, considered healthy by uh DCRs. And fish and wildlife so on standards. And so again really question why why do we need to Hunt in those zones and they're not considered overpopulated at the moment.
So I want to make sure that just we're revisiting this topic and doing the right things to make sure that the trails are safe that our ecosystem is healthy. So again not saying to completely eliminate the population control, but just handle it in a different manner going forward. So I look forward to any questions. And again, uh, make myself available to the committee at any point to discuss. Thank you. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you Representative appreciate your testimony today and taking the time out with us. Are there any questions or comments from members of the2187 committee Seeing none. Thank you very much for your testimony. Uh, and I would like to offer my uh, my apologies to Senator O'Connor who I believe had a panel had to um, folks with him to testify. So I believe they're still on the call. Um, I hope the senator is still with us.2209 But um, the one, the first person on his panel is Elizabeth Magliolo is Elizabeth Maviglio with us. Yes, I am here. Thank you Miss Magglio and I apologize for that confusion. That was my, my mistake.
[ELIZABETH MAGLIO (MASS COALITION TO END PUPPY MILLS):][SB230] That is quite all right, thank you so much. I'm thrilled to be here today to testify I'm one of the founders of the Mass Coalition To End Puppy Mills we're an all volunteer statewide grassroots effort that raises awareness about the connection between puppy mills and pet stores and I'm speaking louder because there's a snoring dog behind me. I apologize. Um, in 2016 we led the effort to get a pet store ban passed in Boston and today2255 we're proud to announce that there are nine local bans across the state. Today, I'm going to mention three reasons to pass Senate 230. the public is being purposely misled consumers bear the costly burden. And people in Massachusetts2271 want change in terms of misleading the public. What we know about this lucrative industry is that their profits are directly tied to misleading consumers and mistreating animals through freedom of information requests right here in Mass. We have been able to connect the dots between a sick or dying puppy here and where it was born and then cross check that with inspection reports from USDA.
The results are nauseating and that's why the pet stores keep their customers in the dark. And the result, my second point is that consumers are paying the price. This puppy pipeline thrives in darkness and it's expensive for us puppies are mass produced in unimaginable circumstances without proper medical care, often without protection from outside elements. They're sold through brokers and their shipped into Massachusetts and then pet stores sell them for high dollar amounts2326 to any customer who is 18 and has a credit card, consumers are usually unprepared for the financial and emotional burdens that come with purchasing a sick pup. And in fact returning a sick pup to the seller is probably certain death for the puppy and getting a refund requires signing a non disclosure form so they're not able to warn anyone else. It's a no win situation for the puppy and for the family facing steep costs. um for returning the pet that they've fallen in love with, which leads to point number three, the people in Massachusetts want change.
This is the third time now we filed this bill. We have filled those walls, we have filled those halls at the State House. We have had so many people come in to testify about this. We've heard from people who think they're buying a pet from a quality breeder, but in fact, they have just been to a local mall at their pet store. I'm sorry to a pet store at a local mall who and they're being sold a bill of goods. Many consumers think papers from the AKC. The American kennel club translates into a quality puppy. What they don't realize that puppy mills provide a revenue stream for the American kennel club. The AKC. Makes money every time a puppy is quote unquote registered, the consumer is literally paying a fee to an organization that fights2403 consumers. And we know this because we research who is paying the lobbyists and which bills they are against.
So in conclusion, there are many forces with very deep pockets that are against the consumers and are misleading consumers and we're the ones paying for it and people want change. So far Massachusetts residents have passed nine local pet store bans and this is our third time at bat and there is a better way And my colleague from the coalition Tara Banano Williams is going to actually talk about some of those specifics in a more humane business, alternative approach that has been taken across the country and that has been taken right here in Massachusetts. Thank you so much for this time. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Very good timing, exactly three minutes. So thank you Miss Magglio. So I would welcome Miss bonanno Williams now please. Sure. All right, um can you hear me? We can awesome.
[TARA BANANNO WILLIAMS (CONCERNED CITIZEN):][SB230][HB384] My name is Tara Bananno Williams and I would like to speak in support of S 230 in H 384. I support small businesses and I also believe in ending the puppy mill pet store connection. These are not mutually exclusive concepts, it's possible to do both. In 2017, I spearheaded a similar bylaw in Stoneham, at our town meeting, residents voted unanimously in favor, here we are over four years later and Stoneham has three successful pet stores, none of which sell dogs or cats. The dirty doodle opened in 2012 and it's a small business that offers professional grooming, self wash, holiday pet photos and supplies such as food supplements, treats and gifts. They are loved and respected by the community and part because2509 of their support for local animal rescue organizations who they often partner with for funds, fundraising efforts, loyal companion is a larger business with various locations around the country. They opened after our by law went into effect and offer everything you could need for a dog or cat as well as grooming and self wash services.
They have made a pledge never to sell a live animal in their stores and also hosts events with local rescue organizations. Finally, Jabberwock Reptiles is another pet store in town that's opened after a by law went into effect. Stoneham also has small scale a small scale breeder in town and the bylaw that passed did not impact that family's ability to operate their business. It's important to note that the stone, um, animal control officer has voiced the support of our bylaw and reports that there have been no issues, violations or concerns as a result, as Senator O'Connor mentioned in 2019, only 4.7% of national revenue from pet stores came from live animals and revenue from the sale of dogs, cats and rabbits was even smaller than that, around 2% Not including services, 40% of revenue was from pet supplies and 45% was from pet food. This this bill would require some pet stores in the state to make some changes to their business model, but this bill would not force them to go out of business.
In fact, the owner of2595 Pet Express, a very controversial chain of pet stores, which sells puppies, also has two stores called Healthy Pets, which operates under a more humane model. In conclusion, more than 2300 pet stores around the country have taken a pledge not to sell puppies and myself and many2614 other consumers would be happy to show support to small businesses who adjust their model to one. That is more fair and humane, thank you so much for your consideration, SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
2625 thank2625 you for your testimony. Are there any questions or comments from the committee members for the panel? Seeing none, I would like to apologize once again to Senator O'Connor and uh thank you for your testimony at the same time. Okay, so um I am looking for a representative Dubois is she with us? I don't see representative to what we will call her when she is able to join repairs and sort of Ayers with us. > Okay, is senator Gobi with us. Mhm. Okay, seeing no further legislators, we will now move into the public portion of the hearing and we will be hearing all testimony in order of the legislation has filed on the docket. So the first bill we're going to be hearing today is house 306 and act relative to the sale of dogs and cats in the Commonwealth. Uh and the first speaker I have listed is Bruce take Hi madam. Chair, can you hear me? We can mr take welcome
[BRUCE TAGUE (SPORTSMAN ALLIANCE):][HB888][SB585][SB551][SB623][HB965][HB384][SB230] Thank you and and uh chair Rausch thank you as well. Members of the committee. My name is Bruce Tague I'm with the Sportsman's Alliance. We are a national organization with members in Massachusetts in all 50 states and we protect the right to hunt fish and trap and that pursuits there of um there are seven bills um that I am speaking on behalf of our Massachusetts members and opposition and Madam Chair. I will go through those uh per your request for the rules and I believe I can get it done within the three minutes. So thank you. First bill is House bill 888. This would ban hunting and trapping as a means to address overpopulated wildlife, aired areas, but also mandates that the state follow local ordinance rules. Um and those rules could be even more restrictive than the traditional hunting and trapping methods currently used in the North American model2765 of conservation, Senate Bill 585. this outrageously expands the definition of a kennel um to any dog owner who breeds one or more dogs on personal property whether they are sold or not. This lump sporting dog and hobby dog breeders into large kennel operations.
A lot of our folks are sporting dog breeders and hobby dog breeders. Um, This would subject them to annual inspections. More stringent rules, regulations, higher cost and will greatly expand the number of state regulated facilities to unmanageable numbers. Um, I would imagine at a high cost to the taxpayers um with those added rules and regulations, Senate Bill 551. this seeks to create an animal advisory board, um that does not represent the sporting dog or hobby breeding community. Um the new board would advise the Massachusetts Department of Agri and Resources MDAR on dog related issues. Um, and although the bill mandates the inclusion of animal welfare organizations, there are currently no slots in the current language for hobby and sporting dog breeders. Um, the next to our companion bills, those are Senate bill 623 and House bill 965, the ban of sale of fur products. Um, while this would not outright ban trapping in the state of Massachusetts um, essentially would, um if our members aren't allowed to trap and and sell.
So, uh, we're obviously opposed to those as well.2859 Finally,2859 Madam, Chair H384 and Senate Bill 230 just discussed a little bit on the sale of animals in the animals only coming from animal shelters or animal rescue organizations. Again, our small hobby breeders and supporting dog breeders, um, you know, be totally cut out these. We understand uh where the proponents of this bill are coming from. Um, no one likes puppy mills, um, but to create a one size fits all2893 mandate, um, it could harm some of our members. So we're opposed to those bills as well. Um, as I'm sure every member on here is where I did2901 reach out to you all individually. Um, and I appreciate it, especially the responses we got back. If any member of the joint committee would like to discuss any of these bills further or have questions or concerns, um, you and staff do have our contact information once again. I would love to thank the committee for allowing me to testify today and I urge a no vote on all of the said bills just related to thank you, madam Chair.
I SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
think I got the under three minutes uh maybe just over I think, but you did. Ok, so2935 I appreciate your testimony and I know you also submitted written testimony which we have and filed with the committee and we'll share with the committee members. Are there any questions or comments from members of the committee? Seeing none. We thank you for your testimony next. We'd like to hear from robert likens.
[ROBERT LIKENS (CONCERNED CITIZEN):][HB384][HB306][SVB230][HB2146][SB551] Thank you, madam Chair. I will be very brief. I'm going to start if I could with with speaking on House Bill 306, House 384 and Senate 230. These are all essentially the same bill. Um what they do is they take the rare bad occurrence or bad actor and generalized that as the norm for the industry when it's just absolutely not the case. Um to be to be very brief, this treats everyone as a worst case situation absolutely would shut down those pet stores in Massachusetts that are selling uh puppies or kittens. Uh There is an alternative that was recently heard in the joint municipalities and regional Government Committee House Bill 2146 with which literally addresses every concern that the proponents of these bills have brought up and does it in a way that doesn't shut down stores. Um it is absolutely untrue to say that that this3017 bill would not shut down stores. It is modeled after the California bill in the two years since the California bill passed 26 of the 28 stores that did sell puppies or kittens and tried to implement the uh, the humane model that is being described here have shut down.
Um uh, just as we were told in Cambridge there ban on the sale of any animals wouldn't shut down stores and within three months Petco was shut down. Um the only other bill I'd like to speak on very briefly and you have my written testimony on all of these committee members. Uh the only other bill I'd like to speak on very briefly is Senate 551. This is the one that creates the animal advisory board. Um Our concern is not that the state is considering creating an animal advisory board, that's a great thing, but the board has to be representative and right now, as mentioned by the last testimony, uh it includes a large number of activist groups but contains no one from the industries or the hobbies or the practices that would be affected by this, whether it be agriculture, the pet trade or uh hunters and so forth. So we would, we would ask that unless it is substantially amended. Senate 551 receives a no vote as well as House 306. House 384 and Senate 230. Uh And I did make it under the three minutes. So thank you very much, Madam. Chair.
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you. Mr Likens appreciate your testimony. Are there any questions or comments from members of the committee? Seeing none. I will now call Judith Embree and while we are waiting for Judith to join, I'd like to introduce Representative Oral and Representative Giannino who have also joined us. So Miss Embry. Hello, thank you for having me. Thank you for coming.
[JUDITH EMBREY (CONCERNED CITIZEN):][SB230][HB384] I'm gonna try not to repeat some of the things that have been said. So um I don't need to go on too much. I don't think about the situation with what dogs are are living in the kennels, the commercial kennels, but I did want to add that the female dogs are usually bread at six months and they're bred every heat until their little bodies are worn out and then they're destroyed. Usually not very humanely. Um And the USDA has the authority3169 to ensure that commercial breeders are upholding the minimum standards which Are not what we would like to see for our own pets. But even those are often not the case, especially I I just want to point out some statistics from 2017 to 2020. If you go back to 2014 when they were doing inspections. The USDA found 2000 violations In 2019. There were 193
In 2020 there were 154. So most of the violations it seems like unless a dog is actually dead, they're considered minor and those are considered teachable moments, so licenses have not been revoked and if the license is not revoked then what good is the inspection? And as the last person said that uh these there are only a few bad actors that simply is not true.
Um Even in cases where violations were recorded on official reports, dogs were caged outdoors in hot or freezing temperatures, puppies were found with visible ribs. Dogs are very often found with open wounds. They are kept in cages where they couldn't stand or turn around and they're fed food contaminated by rodents and still the USDA doesn't act. So I feel that the United States Department of Agriculture is asleep on the job and we need to pass laws for our state to turn this around and protect3268 protect the animals. And I just wanted to make a note that The I think the Senate Bill 230 protects dogs and cats, but H384 has included rabbits in that number as well. And so I think that maybe that needs to be clarified. I'd like to, you know, we'd like to see rabbits and into both bills. Okay, thank you.
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Yeah, my apologies, I was muted. It still happens unfortunately. Um so thank you mr Ray appreciate your testimony and appreciate you being very direct and concise in your in your comments as well. They're they're well taken. Um Are there any questions or comments from committee members seeing none? I would invite Catherine martin to testify please thank. Mhm. Uh Catherine martin is Katherine with us? I do not see Catherine so we will circle back to her if she joins. Uh actually score is obviously Now we'll be hearing testimony on house 384 and3353 Senate to 30 an act banning the retail sale of cats and dogs in pet shops. And I would like to call Stacy Ober please.
[STACY OBER (AKC):][SB230][HB888][HB384][HB890][SB613][HB901][SB531][HB306][HB917][HB901][HB966] Good afternoon Chair Dykema, members of the committee. My name is Stacy Ober and I am the New England legislative analyst and community outreach coordinator for the new the American Kennel Club. I want to just3385 acknowledge that before the committee. I believe I analyzed 17 bills that impact dogs and I have submitted today to use some written testimony and rather than repeat some of the comments that have been made. Um thought I would just take a moment to share some details about who the American Kennel Club is, Our Massachusetts clubs and then to just go on the record and acknowledge that the American Kennel Club does support House 901. House 890. House 966, Senate 613 and Senate 584 because they protect research animals. But we oppose House 306, House 384 Senate 230 Senate 531 because they eliminate current consumer protections that are in law. And we have deep concerns with proposed changes to current animal welfare and safety laws that3442 are proposed in House 888, House 917, Senate 551 and Senate 585 American Kennel Club is a 135 year old not for profit organization that3456 is an expert, recognized for canine health breeding training and also3462 in the promotion of3465 responsible dog ownership.
Today we represent more than 5000 clubs across the country and more than 100 kennel clubs in Massachusetts alone. AKC. Club members know a lot about dogs. Um in 2019 I'll give you one statistic that the AKC. Licensed 464 dog events in Massachusetts alone in which more than 69,0003486 dogs participated, including obedience, agility, rally, confirmation, dock diving and a lot of other events where humans are enjoying that canine human bond. Um As a not for profit. AKC. Supports communities through a variety of programs as well, such as our Canine Health Foundation which is3508 funded more than $59 million in canine health research benefiting all dogs our AKC.3512 Humane fund provides grants to3514 domestic violence shelters supporting the accommodation of victims and their pets and are AKC. Reunite program incentivizes our kennel clubs in a 3 to 1 adopt a canine cop matching grant when municipalities3528 are in need but can't afford a police canine.
I've submitted written testimony on the bills with some recommendations and want to urge the committee um to vote in and follow along with the recommendations that we have submitted on behalf of these bills and I'm here to answer any questions folks might have. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you Mr Barber appreciate your testimony. Are there any comments or questions from committee members? Seeing none. I am going to welcome Senator Bruce Tarr who has joined us so we're going to take a brief a brief break in3572 our lineup here to welcome Senator Tarr and hear from him. So Senator the floor is yours.
[SEN TARR:][SB613] Well thank you madam chair and through you to the members of the committee and I3581 will be extremely brief for two reasons. Number one, I do appreciate being taken out of turn and number two. The Senate is currently in session and I've stepped away from the floor for just a moment and while I do support a number of the bills that are before the committee today and look forward to corresponding with you about those bills. I wanted to focus today, my attention on one bill in particular which is Senate 613 which relates to research animals and adoption of research animals and madam chair. I first want to say how much I appreciate your partnership and collaboration On this issue. This bill is no stranger or the substance of the bill is no stranger to the committee. Um it's something that we have all been working on for a number of years and I truly believe3626 that Senate 613 represents a evolved bill that reflects a lot of compromise between the various stakeholders, but a compromise that does not compromise the3639 goal of the bill.
Which is to ensure that research animals who have given and continue to give so much for the quality of our lives and in fact are engaged in lifesaving research, that when their time of sacrifice on our behalf has done that they have an opportunity to live as normal a life as possible um and go out into the world and be treated as other animals would be uh in their cohort and particularly Madam chair, we pay attention here to Beagles which are most often the subject of this type of research and also would be the3675 focus of this bill. And I would just point out that the goal of this legislation is not to stop medical research in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, but just to ensure that the animals and particularly the Beagles who make that sacrifice and who endure conditions that are not necessarily hospitable that they have a chance if possible, um to be adopted when their service is done. Um there is much more to the story and I know that you are aware of that and I suspect other members of the committee are as well but I3707 would hope that the committee would act expeditiously on this matter so that we can move this legislation and bring it to fruition uh in this legislative session so that research animals can have a chance at a second life and a much different life than the one that they are involved in when they are doing their service with research. Thank you madam Chair and through you to the members of the committee,
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
thank you Senator, appreciate your testimony and your your passion for animals and your advocacy on this bill in particular. I know you've3738 done a tremendous amount of work on this. Are there any questions or comments from members of the committee? Seeing none. Thank you Senator for your time here today. Thank you very much. Now welcome Marlene Wilhelm. Mhm
[MARLENE WILHELM (HOUSE RABBIT CONNECTION):][HB384] Thank you madam3762 chair and our committee. I want to um I ask you to support bill 384 and that's to add um banning the sale of commercially bred cats and dogs um in Massachusetts pet stores. I am the current president of the House Rabbit Connection. We are a non profit 501(c) (3) based out of Springfield and I have been involved in animal rescue for over 20 years. Um And I wanted to mirror what senator O'Connor and Elizabeth Maglio Tara Williams and especially Judith Embery had said I would love to see rabbits added to that and the reason being and I have included written testimony as well to support this, that commercially bred rabbits are bred um prior to Easter on mass to be put into pet stores for people3813 to purchase rabbits for Easter gifts or for other gifts during the year. And um that is something a practice that I would like to see coming to an end. A lot of people don't realize how difficult rabbits are actually raised and I'm talking about domestic rabbits that are3831 indoor rabbits commercially.
I'm sorry, litter box trained in housebroken. Um and I would like to see them kept out of pet stores, especially because of the Easter situation.3842 Um let's see. Uh basically I think that's pretty much it is that if you can't add rabbits um currently to this bill, I'd like to see it added later. Um I'd be happy to take any questions. Um so I thank you for giving me this opportunity to testify. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you Miss will home, are there any questions or comments from committee members Seeing none. We appreciate your testimony. Uh Jason and I hope I pronounced this right Puppolo podia kalakota. It's just a letter. Hi Jason, please tell us how to pronounce your last name. My apologies, I'm sure I got it wrong. Thank you. The floor is yours, sir.3895
[JASON PALAPODA (DOGS ADVOCATE):][HB384][SB230] Thank you. So my name is Jason Palapoda and I'm a dog advocates of Massachusetts. I support H 384 and S 2303903 acts banning the retail sale of cats and dogs in pet shops. I submitted written testimony including my website dog advocates Emma dot com, which documents proof of my following statements to start Massachusetts. Pet stores acquire their puppies from large commercial breeders and brokers. They're not getting their puppies from local breeders who treat there dogs like family, they're getting their puppies from large scale operations from as far away as Minnesota and Missouri for example, A review of certificates of veterinary inspection shows massive shipments of over 20 puppies at a time from meeting enterprises to Pet Express. Many enterprises, a commercial breeding facility in Minnesota with hundreds of dogs, certificates of veterinary inspection also show what I call the Neosho Missouri connection. Over the years, Massachusetts, pet stores have acquired their puppies from the same massive cluster of brokers and transporters based out of Neosho Missouri.
for example, the puppy place in Springfield Pet Express and fish bowl aquarium and Pet Mart in Fall River have all acquired puppies from a puppy3965 mill network based in Neosho Missouri, including pinnacle, pet and puppy travelers. Over the years, puppy travelers has been responsible for puppy sickness, injuries and death in terms of sick puppies being sold to consumers. All you need to do is look at online reviews of these pet stores, yelp and google reviews of Park Avenue birds and pet supply and West Bridgewater show consumers writing about puppies presenting with sickness and failing health soon after purchase. Sure you'll see reviews from consumers who happen to acquire a3994 healthy puppy. But one dead puppy resulting from this massive puppy mill network focused on profit where congenital and communicable diseases among puppies are rampant is one too many suffering and dying puppy should not be viewed as collateral damage because pet stores can say they sell healthy puppies.
Sometimes in this industry, dogs are considered assets and products and disposable when they are deemed not profitable. This brings me to USDA licensure. Pet stores like to claim all our breeders are USDA licensed there not puppy mills. This is one of the most misleading statements that pet store will make and I'd like to give you an example of the uselessness of USDA licensure with the breeder by the name of Judy Hewlett in 2019, USDA inspectors noted the following issues with her facility An excessively thin pregnant dog two dogs with severe dental problems two dogs with ear lesions. One dog with fur loss, one dog with feces caked on her back two dogs with major eye problems. Dogs kept outside without betting in temperatures under 35°. A very large number of cockroaches a strong odor of ammonia and the entire leg of two puppies flipping through wire flooring.
All of these were documented as non critical by the inspectors she was never fined and the inspections kept giving her break after break. She continues to4075 be usd. USDA licensed through March 2022 And the last inspection was November 2019. So if a pet store acquires puppies from a breeder and states she is USDA licensed we can't with a straight face say this has any value at all. This whole system perpetuates dogs suffering period. I urge you to go to dog advocates ma dot com to see for yourself. Also while puppy mills are the most cited. This absolutely happens with cats and rabbits. So I urge you to pass this for cats and rabbits as well. Thank you.
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Yeah thank you mr palapa. And if you could um submit written testimony that would be very helpful for the committee gave some statistics and information there. That would be helpful to have in writing. Thank you for your testimony. Carol conquest please.
[KARA HOLMQUIST (MSPCA):][HB384][SB230][SB550][SB538] Thank you. Chair Dykema Chair Rausch and members of the committee Kara Holmquist with the M.S.P.C.A. I'd like to testify very briefly for House bill 384 and Senate Bill 230 that you've been um hearing about. Also briefly mentioned two other bills that we're submitting written4141 testimony and many of the other bills that are being heard today that we are in favor of. You've4145 already heard a lot of good testimony and the reasons for passing these bills. I don't want to repeat anything that Senator O'Connor or the other folks have said so. Well, I'll give you just a few instances4156 of my own professional experience dealing with this issue. I've just, I've answered so many calls from people who have purchased a sick puppy from a pet store over the time I've been at the MSPCA, this is not an outlier. This is not a small problem. This is standard for large scale breeders for the puppy mills. It's, it's a consumer issue too, it's an animal welfare issue, but it's a consumer protection issue. But this is very common.
And we see these cases at Angell too um, I also just like to mention a little bit more about the local ordinances that are really4189 gaining steam in Massachusetts, as you know, Holliston was one of those that passed Boston Cambridge Pittsfield. And just recently, Springfield. And so more than a million residents in Massachusetts have a law in their city or town that covers this issue. That doesn't allow pet stores to sell, uh, puppy mill puppies, um, but does allow them to partner with shelters and rescues to provide a humane source for obtaining an4214 animal. I've also personally done that, that record research that other people have mentioned from MDAR and USDA records to show this connection that Massachusetts does have and, and uh, that these, these large scale facilities with a huge amount of problems have imported or sent puppies into Massachusetts that have been sold in our pet stores. It's an absolute problem.
Um So we really hope you look at this bill favorably and we do support the inclusion of rabbits. I'd also like to really briefly mentioned Senate bill 550. It's an act relative to heartworm in dogs. Um This bill would save the lives of animals by removing a strict ban on the importation from4258 other states for dogs who test positive for microfilaria or heartworm antigen. Instead, the law would allow the American heartworm association to be referenced, which is4270 more appropriate. It follows other shelter regulations where the American Animal Hospital Association is cited the American Association of feline practitioners and referencing these organizations is helpful because the science changes the best practices change. And4285 we I think this will save a lot animal lives.
And lastly Senate Bill 538 would allow additional funding into the Mass animal fund um from fines and fees that a minor issues. They're ok with this. It's a really important time for the Mass animal fund that helps homeless animals and animals that belong to families who can't afford basic health services and with COVID and the impact still lingering with things getting more expensive for a lot of families who really think this is a really important time to pass this legislation. Thank you.
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you Miss Conquest. Are there any questions or comments from committee members seeing none. Thank you for your testimony. And I'd4327 also like to welcome representative Gentile Yeah. Next, I'd like to call Ryan Kearney please,
[RYAN KEARNEY (RAM):][HB384][SB230][HB306][SB965][SB623] Madam Chair. Thank you for the opportunity to speak before the committee. Um, My name is Ryan Kearney general counsel of the Retailers Association of Massachusetts. I'm here to testify in opposition of a series of two bills. The first is those that are banning the retail sale4353 of cats and dogs. And the second would be those banning fur product sales here in Massachusetts, I will be submitting more specific written testimony to the committee on either of those issues, but just kind of in general terms, both of these kind of one size fits all pieces of legislation are considered by our association as anti small business, anti consumer choice and they place4375 Massachusetts businesses at a competitive disadvantage to out of state and online operators. Unfortunately, this proposal, you know, will not decrease the supply of available product into Massachusetts consumers, but4386 merely shift those sales to alternative out of state sources whether they be online or they be over the state lines where this prohibition would not be in place, but it would result in a loss of revenue to in state operations and thereby threatening their viability uh and uh in particular for those exclusively selling fur products.
It would also lead to the closure of their business without any recourse or any compensation. The unfortunately reality is that most of these sellers uh impacted by the proposals are too small businesses often family owned and some for for generations have had these businesses in their home, uh, in their family to jeopardize the continued operation of these businesses. The jobs they support and the tax revenue that they generate for the state is simply unfair and bad public policy for those reasons. Uh, retailer's Association of Massachusetts4434 asked that you oppose House 306, House 384 Senate 230 post 965 and Senate. I'm sorry, Senate 965 and I'm sorry, I did have a correct hosted 965 and Senate 623. I appreciate your consideration of these remarks and I will be sending written testimony. Thank you.
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you. Mr Kearney and we'll be watching for that written testimony. Are there any comments or questions from committee members seeing none. I'd like to welcome Elizabeth Orrick.
[ELIZABETH ORECK (BEST FRIENDS PUPPY MILL INTIATIVE):][HB384][SB230] Yeah, good afternoon. Honorable chairs, vice chairs and members of the joint committee. My name is Elizabeth Oreck I'm the national Manager Puppy Mill Initiatives for Best Friends, animal society4483 and I'm here on behalf of our thousands of Massachusetts members, supporters and partners in full support of H 384 and S 230. The fact is puppy and kitten mills are in business to4496 supply pet stores responsible breeders don't sell to pet stores because they don't sell to third parties and because it's not financially viable and this pledge never to sell a puppy to a pet store can be found in every reputable breeders code of ethics, including nearly all of the parent breed clubs of the American Kennel Club that were just referenced by Ms. Ober. Although the4515 commercial breeders who do sell to pet stores may be regulated by the USDA. As you've heard, the federal care standards do not ensure quality breeding or humane life for animals. Dogs are allowed to be confined to tiny wire cages only six inches larger than the dogs, 24 hours a day, seven days a week for their entire lives, forced to breed every cycle in order to produce as many puppies as possible.
These are the dogs producing puppies for local pet stores. The substandard breeding that occurs in these mostly out of state facilities that Massachusetts has no way of regulating or inspecting means that unsuspecting buyers are often faced with a pet having physical genetic and psychological problems that can cause them to be surrendered to shelters when the emotional toll and the vet bills become insurmountable. So again, this is not just the humane issue. It's a consumer protection issue and it's a public health issue. Massachusetts is one of 21 states to have been hit by an outbreak of a strain of bacteria called campylobacter that is linked to pet shop puppies by the CDC. campylobacter is resistant to antibiotics and contagious to humans. Now, more than ever, Massachusetts, residents should not be exposed to this serious public health threat. And yet there is a viable alternative which is for pet stores to stop supporting puppy and kitten mills by transitioning to a humane business model that focuses on profitable products and services as thousands of pet stores across the country are already doing very successfully and ideally allowing space for shelters and rescue groups to showcase adoptable animals.
It's a win win for pets consumers and the state. So this bill would not prevent pet stores from doing business. It would not impact private breeders who could continue to sell directly to the public and it would not prevent anyone from adopting an animal. This bill is a fair effective and reasonable way to prevent an endless supply of inhumanely bred pets from coming into the state4628 so that consumers are protected and fewer animals will have to suffer in order to supply the retail4633 pet trade and to support local shelters by getting companion animals into retail settings where they have a greater chance of being adopted by the public. That's why Boston Cambridge and more than 420 other cities, counties and states have already enacted similar legislation. So on behalf of Best Friends and our members, supporters and partners throughout massachusetts. I want to thank you for considering this important reform. I did submit online testimony and available for any questions. Thank you.
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you. Are there any questions or comments from members of the committee. Seeing none. I understand that Kathy martin, who we had called earlier was having some trouble logging on. So I'm in a, I called Kathy Catherine martin please.
[CATHERINE MARTIN (LUCKY LAB RESCUE AND ADOPTION):][HB384][SB230] Hi, my name is Catherine Martin and I'm the president of Lucky Lab Rescue and Adoption. And let me first start off by saying that rescue totally agrees that there should be rules surrounding the importation of dogs cats into Massachusetts and other states. There should be standards for the safety of the animals for the people who handle them and to protect public health, public safety and prevent the spread of disease. Regulations that require vaccines, microchips, spaying, Neutering and health certificates make complete sense to us. What does not make sense is forcing nonprofits nonprofit rescues to pay state regulated quarantine facilities to house dogs for 48 hours after they arrive in Massachusetts. Dogs already stressed from traveling on transport are put into quarantine kennel facilities with dozens of other dogs where they sit for two days. Imagine if you were one of those dogs wondering who was coming for them wondering are they back in the animal shelter?
This unnecessary stay is taxing on the dog, both physically and mentally, sadly Lucky Lab cannot adopt dogs into Massachusetts because there are a limited supply of these quarantine facilities and none have openings to work with new rescues. Many rescues in a similar situation. Furthermore having to pay to quarantine an animals puts4765 an undue burden on already cash strapped nonprofit rescues. Some may say rescues charge an adoption fee, they aren't cash strapped, ask any rescue if, if an adoption fee covers their cost, they don't, they don't even come close. I want to point out that there is no state site oversight for dog breeders in Massachusetts, breeders do not face pages and pages of rules and regulations enacted by the state. Yet rescues have to jump through expensive and unreasonable hoops.
We believe we believe a dog's post transport quarantine time can be safely done in an adopter, adopters or a foster home. The animals who have already been vaccinated, they will have been examined by a veterinarian and have received health certificates indicating they have no signs of communicable diseases before the inter Massachusetts. If animals could be quarantined in a foster or adoptive home, it would not be unreasonable to ask that two days after the dog arrives in Massachusetts, they be examined by a veterinarian. The very civilized state of Connecticut4829 has the same kind of reasonable rule. Quarantine kennels are not required, but follow up health certificate certificate certificates are required. Massachusetts is filled with many responsible pet owners4840 who want to adopt, who want to foster and who want to follow the rules.
There is a huge demand to adopt dogs in Massachusetts, These adopters are a lifeline for dogs and other parts of the United States, there are overcrowded shelters, kill dogs and cats for space reasons. The whole puppy pandemic thing you heard about last year is over. I see what is happening on the front lines. right now, shelters are full again and unwanted animals who need4868 Homes sadly unless things change in Massachusetts, more unwanted animals4872 will die in shelters.4873 Rescues can bring dogs here because people want to adopt them. But if we can bring them here in, rescues continue to be continue to be held4885 to unreasonable quarantine requirements, more dogs will die. Thank you for your consideration.
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you Miss martin. Are there any comments or questions from members of the committee? Seeing none. We will now move on to testimony for House 854, an act relating to the safety of wild turkeys. John monta Magne please. Yeah Mr Monti Magne does not appear to be online at this moment, but we will call him again before the end of the hearing. Moving on to testimony on House 8 90 House nine no one and Senate 6 13 an act protecting research animals and I'd like to call James O. Reilly please.
[JAMES O'REILLY (MSMR):][HB890][HB901][SB613] Yes, thank you madam. Chairwoman. Um Good afternoon Chairman Rausch Chairman, Dykema members of the committee. My name is Jim O'Reilly. I'm the president of the Massachusetts Society for Medical Research. SMR is the nation's oldest non profit biomedical research organization founded in 1953. We represent the colleges, universities, hospitals, private companies throughout New England area that conduct medical research4961 that lead to the discovery of life saving medications including I'm very proud to say the COVID nine. COVID 19 vaccines which were developed by three M.S.M.R. member institutions. Um I'm here to testify today on Senate 613, House 890 House 901 all related to the adoption of research animals. Um One point of fact is that the very small percentage less than 1%. In fact, of all medical research conducted in Massachusetts involves cats or dogs, vast majority of other species rats, mice, zebrafish primarily. Um but for the research that does involve cats and dogs our members have very carefully developed adoption programs and had for years um including partnerships with private individuals and other agencies that they have very long standing professional relationships and involved careful screening.
Um these are also very carefully reviewed as part of federally mandated oversight committees. So for that reason, among others. Prior to 2019, we had opposed this type of legislation because we were concerned about the provision and how they might adversely affect medical research in the state um and also about potentially unqualified individuals or institutions gaining standing um and trumping the professional judgment of the attending veterinarian of these institutions.5038 However, we always remain committed to the same principles that we believe that you uh and Representative Dubois and Senator Tarr have all espoused in introducing this legislation, namely that any research animals that can be adopted should be adopted at the end of their research terms, but under the supervision of a qualified veterinarian that's overseeing the care of these animals during their time.
So an attempt to find common5061 ground. In 2019 we met with Senator Tarr and his staff representatives of several animal rescue groups in attempted to5068 come up with some5069 consensus language that would promote the goals of these bills but still address the concerns of the biomedical research community in Massachusetts. And we believe that the bills that have been submitted to this committee this year for hearing today, addressed those concerns making those bills that we can now support. Um I do want to make one specific note with regard to the principles for adoption that are enunciated in this legislation. These were drawn directly from principles that have been listed by the American Veterinary Medical Association and the American College of Laboratory Animal Medicine. Um and they particularly call out the need to carefully screen adopting institutions for things like criminal history and we think it's very important that those be retained. These were principles reached in consensus with our organization as well as the MSPCA and the local chapter of the Humane Society.
So we want to make sure that we call that uh specifically that those provisions are retained within this legislation. Um I think we would all agree that safeguards that this state has5124 taken historically to protect animals should be maintained in this. And so that's why we want to make sure that's particularly noted in summation, like to thank you Chairman Dykema as well as Senator Tarr Representative DuBois for the work, your willingness to work with the biomedical research community to address our concerns. I'm happy to take any questions and appreciate your time. I've also submitted my testimony in writing to the committee. Thank you.
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you Mr O'Reilly, are there any questions or comments from committee members Seeing none. I'd welcome dr Joanne lindenmeyer. Okay, can you hear me? Sure document? We can hear you loud and clear. Dr Whelan Thank you.
5171 [JOANN LINDENMAYER (MAC):][SB613][HB901][HB890] Uh thank you so much for allowing me to speak here today. Um my name is Joann lindenmayer and I'm here to offer testimony on behalf of Senate 613, House 901 and and House 890 which is an act protecting research animals. So I'm a veterinarian, also a public health professional and today I represent the Massachusetts animal coalition are always also known as MAC, Which is a statewide coalition of more than 120 animal shelters, rescue organizations and individuals that are united in our efforts to strengthen animal welfare. In Massachusetts, MAC leads efforts to reduce the number of homeless neglected displaced and abused companion animals by supporting constructive communication and strategic collaboration among members of the animal welfare community. More than 15% of the 65,000 dogs and more than 3.5% of the 20,00- cats in research in the United States are held in Massachusetts laboratories. The dogs and cats I advocate for today were once wanted only as research subjects? Those that survived the research but pose no danger to people or other animals meet the definition of homeless animals because the research laboratory has never been and can never be a home.
Several5247 decades ago after I returned to Boston from three years in the Peace Corps, I took a job in a research laboratory in Boston where we subjected cats, rabbits and other animals to repeated surgeries and then killed them. When the studies ended, I am deeply, deeply ashamed of what I did and I vowed there after that I would speak up with the hope that never again would an animal be killed just because it was no longer of use to us. This is why I am here today. Dr Albert Schweitzer, who5276 is a physician theologian, humanitarian philosopher, brighter and medical missionary5282 in Lambarene in Gabon Central African continent is my hero in his book,5287 civilization and ethics. He wrote, ethics is none other than reverence for life. Reverence for life affords me my fundamental principle of morality,5297 namely that good consists in maintaining,5300 assisting and enhancing life and to destroy, to harm or to hinder life is evil. We need a boundless ethics which includes the animals also. Socrates to find ethics as no small matter, but how we ought to live.
Bills to protect research animals were first introduced in 2017 and I understand well that you are all busy people who have many pressing matters before you. But in the past four years, how many puppies and kittens were born into facilities for the sole purpose of using them for research. And how many dogs and cats like Teddy. And you will hear from teddy's owners shortly who spent 14 years in a research laboratory or my own two Beagles who spent six years there were killed just because we no longer had a use for them. The decision that you face today is whether or not you care enough to tip the scale towards the side that offers these dogs and cats a chance for life in a loving family rather than a premature and unnecessary death after they have been used to benefit us. For which ones among you do. Your ethics include maintaining assisting and enhancing the lives of dogs and cats used in research I believe you know in your hearts that these animals deserve better and will vote to support this bill. Thank you for your time.
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you doctor for your testimony. Are there any comments or questions from committee members seeing none? I'd like to call Attorney Sean flaherty is attorney clarity with us? Mhm. Not seeing him, Elizabeth. Betty bear. Is this bear with us? I also do not uh Miss Bear. Is that you? Yes with me? I can I can hear you. Can you hear me? You know? Yes. Okay.
[BETTY BARRE (CONCERNED CITIZEN):][SB613] Um My name is Betty Barre and I come from Lynn Massachusetts.5437 I was the proud parent of Teddy. A survivor of animal testing. I adopted him when he was released from a lab. at 14 years old, Teddy learned how to drink from a bowl and eat from a bowl. Although he liked eating his food off the floor. He loved going up and down the stairs lots of times he would fall down them. He never experienced stairs before,5463 but that had5464 never stopped him. He thought it was fun. Um, he loved all kids, he loved the kids next door who would ride him around in a wagon. They can live a normal life out of the lab and they deserve every second of it After being tested on Teddy had 15 wonderful months with me and5483 he passed at 15 years and eight months and we, there is not a day that goes by that I don't think of him. There is no reason that they can't live wonderful lives with us if given the chance, there are many people ready to adopt them. Thank you for having me.
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you. And teddy sounds like a very special and lucky dog. three Sheets testimony today. Are there any questions or comments from committee members seeing none? I do see that Attorney flaherty has joined us. Attorney flaherty, can you hear me? We can still not hear you seeing in the chat that Attorney flaherty was having trouble on muting himself. You should be able to a mute yourself. But the shame is I don't I don't know if you can hear and and can help attorney florida on you. < Okay? We'll continue working on that technology. Um, in the meantime we are moving on to testimony on House 903 and Senate 576. An act relative to ivory and rhinoceros horn trafficking. And I would like to welcome lad thorn if mr thorn is with us. Mhm. Mr thorn. Okay. Mr thorn is not here with us. I'd now like to invite a panel um comprised of Cynthia mead and laura Hagen. So Cynthia the floor is yours. Thank you. I'm actually going to let laura go first and I will follow up Lawrence. Sorry, I'm sure.
[LAURA HAGEN (HUMANE SOCIETY):][HB903][SB576] Good afternoon. My name is Laura Hagen in the Massachusetts. State Director for the Humane Society of the United States. I'm here to speak in support of House 903 and Senate bill 576 as Rep Ehrlich Who told5634 the story of why we filed these bills so eloquently earlier. Um, as she mentioned, the crux of the legality of these bills is that while federal law5645 limits interstate trade and Iran rhino horn. Uh, there is no law prohibiting the trade within the commonwealth. The federal endangered species act only implicates only implicates sales that happen across state lines. So one comment question that we get as we've been working on this bill as Rep Erlich said for a number of years as well. Why address the in state sales in Massachusetts? What we've seen on the federal level for context is that while we do have these laws that impact in prohibit interstate trade of these items trafficking, still, in fact, less than 10 days ago, federal officials seized over £2000 of illegal ivory in Seattle.
These products were being shipped into the U. S. From the DRC to be sold illegally in the United States. So we know that the legal products are in5700 the United States, we know that they are continuing to come into the United States and we have also seen their sales in the Commonwealth illegal products. When these bills were first filed, excuse me. A Boston globe investigation found illegal ivory sales in numerous business locations, ultimately leading the globe to characterize the Massachusetts ivory market as a quote brisk trade in illegal5726 illegal ivory. And his Representative, Ehrlich mentioned two undercover investigations in 2000 and 17 and 2000 and 19 found robust sales of undocumented and potentially illegal ivory sold across the commonwealth from Great Barrington to the North shore to the Cape. Federal. Criminal investigations have also repeatedly turned up Massachusetts connections to illegal ivory sales in 2018, a conquered shipping business owner pled guilty to federal wildlife trafficking charges after using more cargo business in a scheme to smuggle nearly three quarters of a million dollars worth of illegal ivory and rhino horn out of the country in 2016 a New York's antiques dealer smuggled illegal elephant ivory and from Canada selling them to a Massachusetts buyer.
In 2014, Massachusetts buyers were identified as part of the seizure of one of the largest known cases of illegal ivory in the United States. So we know that these items being sold here in Massachusetts and the bills before the committee are a result of significant work and compromise with the committee and with legislators on how best to address this issue in the Commonwealth as Rob Ehrlich indicated. They do include a number of exemptions that mirror federal law. And with these exemptions do is essentially asked Massachusetts, retailers, auction houses and5803 individual sellers to comply with the same requirements established by the federal endangered Species Act. If these outlets are advertising or selling the items online, selling the items to an out of state buyer or shipping the items using the U. S. Postal Service, they should be meeting the same exact standards under federal law anyway, it is more than reasonable to apply the same standards to sales of these critically endangered species within our state. These bills can make a big difference in continuing to reduce the ivory and rhino horn trade in the Commonwealth5835 and in the United States. And we urge your support for these bills. Thank you.
[CYNTHIA MEAD (ZOO NEW ENGLAND):][SB576]HB903] Thank you madam chairwoman. My name is Cynthia Mead and I worked for Zoo, New England. The Franklin park and stones zoos and I'm here today to talk a little bit about why um this bill is so incredibly necessary. Um elephants on the whole and rhinos have very long reproductive rates. So for instance, an elephant is pregnant for 22 months. A rhino is pregnant for 16 months respectively, And they do not begin to breed until they are older, 10 or 12 years old. Um the recent studies have indicated that The birth rate for elephants is 5% annually and the poaching rate, deaths from poaching not from other causes, such as conflicts of war or famine or drought or old age. But poaching alone accounts for 4% of the annual deaths every year. So to continue to hunt elephants and rhinos is basically unsustainable. And what happened when um it was determined that it was unsustainable to continue to hunt whales and walruses for scrimshaw and other trinkets items, You know, a law went into effect and um the industry's adapted right?
They adapted and how they adapted as they went to ivory. So what we're asking is for the same recognition to happen, the same protections to be put into place for other animals, marine mammals that were in fact identified as critically endangered, which is where we find the elephants and the rhinos at this point in time. Um I would like to talk a little bit about um what I've heard over the past eight years with regard to um everybody seems to agree that nobody wants elephants and rhinos to become extinct. But they talk about substitutes and there are substitutes for um ivory. Um But it is not um it's not mammoth. Um It can be resin. There are other bones from other animals that um you know frankly come out of the food um industry that could be used. Um It is simply not sustainable to also have a mammoth. And the reason why is the only way you can determine definitively if something is elephant or something is mammoth is through a DNA. Tests. They can come close to determining whether something might be mammoth or might be5996 elephant but you can only determine it through5999 certain peptide tests in DNA testing.
And the reason is because while you will hear a lot about Trager lines and I know you can't see very well I was up at the state house you guys could hold these um there are some different lines that appear on ivory and on mammoth. The problem is ivory goods um worked goods are in fact um carved and so once you start carving an item you cannot reasonably count on um the lines to tell you number one whether or not it's mammoth arrive or Ivory. U. N. Has said it needs to be in laboratory conditions and you need you know a a color copier um Ultraviolet light pro tractors rulers. The customer cannot protect themselves. And so I would ask that we take the time now and just say it is time to transition out of using ivory mammoth and the other um species that are covered under these bills, rhinos and move away from these endangered species and give them a chance to recover. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Are there any questions or comments for either member of the panel? Seeing none. We thank you for your testimony and I understand that lad thorn has joined. Mr thorn. Are you able to your on mute? I am here. I I hope you can see me and hear me. Wonderful. We can see you when we can hear you welcome. Thank you.
[LUDD THORNE (CONCERNED CITIZEN):][SB576][HB903] So I would like to thank you and your fellow chairwoman uh for inviting me to this meeting. Other members of the committee. I appreciate your interest and your time I and many, many other people in the state of Massachusetts share with the6115 proponents of these two bills the priority of saving the endangered species of elephants and rhinos. I have seen it in the wild, I've been with them in the wild. It is a fantastic experience. They are God's creatures and very, very important to our planet. Indeed, I know of no argument that could be made against that or these bills in my view, do not effectively provide a solution to the protection of those animals. The contrary, the bills are very flawed In four Basic Ways.
Number one cost those would of necessity require that enforcement and particularly the personnel involved in enforcement to be well trained knowing what physical attributes and the materials they are evaluating for confiscation without proper training. Confiscation is capricious and ill informed. Any item could be confiscated, the large majority of which should not be confiscated,6190 causing likely and undeserved financial harmed harm to the accused. Furthermore, the6198 staffing of the agency there was doing the confiscating would have to be increased at great cost
due process. The proposed legislation renders a citizen guilty unless proven innocent and it puts the burden of proving innocence on the accused rather than the accuser totally anathema to everything we hold dear6222 about due process and the criminal conviction of our citizens in our country and in our state, in short, the proposed legislation would inevitably end unfairly tarnish and punish people the vast majority of whom I've done nothing wrong. The problem, the problem itself is ill defined if there was serious trafficking, these animal products6251 that was the result of killing these animals recently or currently it would be front page news on a regular basis and the reporting would be true investigative reporting, backed up by documented factual information, not hearsay and innuendo, just how many cases of trafficking had there been in the past two or three years where conviction was obtained.
I would really like to know that the complexity of the bill is the next item. The bills are loaded with numerous requirements of proof on the ordinary citizen with the items they own if they want to sell them? Let's take one of many examples in the bills they are far too many to discuss in this in this hearing today, but I will address them in written testimony. Take the one example of the exception in subsection two c. 3. Mhm. It is impossible for the average person to comply with it. This paragraph states that musical instruments are exempt from6324 the ban on the sale of the restricted material. If the ivory was legally acquired and the total weight of the ivory or rhinoceros horn is less than 200 g, it would be impossible for the owner of a musical instrument to know if the instruments manufacturer acquired the restricted materials legally, how would they know that?
How are the owner of a violin or flute manufactured and say 1930 determine if6356 the restricted materials were legally acquired by the manufacturer.
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Mr Thorn. I'm sorry to interrupt. I don't know whether you were present at the beginning of the hearing but we are limited to three6371 minutes per um presenter and that chimes was the end of your three minutes. So welcome your if you could submit that testimony in written format. That would be um terrific. And we can certainly um you know get the address for how to do that. I also wanted to let you know that representative. McMurtry also did reach out to the6392 committee um and share some information as well. So we will look forward to getting your written testimony and I appreciate you're presenting here today. Can I just make one final comment that you can make a brief? Yes. Yeah.
[THORNE:] If there is really a major problem, why aren't taxpayers uh focusing this money that would be required to do all of this policing on the problem where it exists6422 in Africa and Asia, why aren't we supporting organizations there where the root of the problem exists.
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you very much. Mr thorn. Mhm. Okay. Um I need to step away from the gavel for a moment so I'm going to be turning this over to the Vice chair of the committee. Representative Domb to chair the hearing for the next little bit. But while we transition over to vice chair Domb I'd6451 like to call Allen Granby please. Is mr Graham be with us? Yes. Not seeing mr Graham B Is there an Andrew Jacobson? Yes. Not seeing Mr Jacobson is Michael Vienna with us? Yes, I'm here. Wonderful. I hope I pronounced your last name6480 even close to appropriately. And if not, I apologize, that was good, very close. Great, welcome. The floor is yours.
[MICHEAL VIENNEAU (SCRIMSHANDER GALLERY):][SB476][HB903] Yes, my name is Michael Vienneau. I've lived on Nantucket now since 1974 and I've been a professional scrimshander here since then And in 1990 I opened my own shock and I've been self, employed you know with the Scrimshander Gallery ever since Back in the late 90s, I made a move and I completely got away from elephant ivory because of the ethical and moral moral implications. And I switched over to mammoth ivory. And my big problem with this bill is the fact that it's included mammoth6534 and mastodon ivory and with elephant ivory, I mean, I might even support the bill because I don't use elephant ivory in my gallery and I'm I'm probably one of the last galleries in the state. I don't think anyone else sells it primarily. I I sell whales teeth and antique walrus6555 ivory and antique scrimshaw, but I do a lot of carving on woolly mammoth ivory6561 because you can ship it out of state6563 and out of the country if you have to. Mhm.
But I oppose this bill, I would support it if it wasn't if the mammoth and mastodon wasn't in it, and that pretty much sums it up, I don't want to have to close and go out of business. This could put me out of business, and force me into early retirement and that would be sad for the future generations, especially here on Nantucket Where on the last scrimshander here, the last scrimshaw shop, that will be gone. That6595 would be a thing of the past. It's just another straw to break the camel's back as they say, and I'm sorry to see that this6605 was included in this bill, but I hope I hope everyone does the right thing is all I can say. Thanks for listening and I appreciate it. Thank you very much. much.
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you mr Vienot and we appreciate your testimony. Are there any questions from the committee members? See none.6624 We thank you so much sir. Thank you. Is there a scot different here john Silvia Bill born? Ryan Karaca Kericho Bill Born is here. Um > Bill Born, are you here? Okay great thank you sir. You have the floor and you're limited to three minutes. I don't know if you heard for growth testimony but you're unlimited for written testimony. So um you end up needing to say Moore you can put it in writing, please continue.
[BILL BOURNE (CONCERNED CITIZEN):][HB903][SB576] Thank you for the opportunity to speak on behalf of the law6672 and on behalf of the committee. The law right over relatively well. Sometimes it's on layman's term a little confusing on that end of it. I'm not an attorney, but I worked for an auction house on Cape Cod. And uh three or four years ago we were hampered a little bit by a law that was coming up that did include marine mammal material I believe at that point I was at the state house almost midnight uh, make6698 a long story short, most of the antique aspects of the law seem to be somewhat in line with preserving hopefully the elephants the rhinoceros we all do not want to see you know them go extinct at this uh at any point in time or juncture But the the realism is, to me is anytime laws like this come about, it tends to facilitate something six months to six years from now of another law that could hamper our business that we do, Which mostly is antique Scrimshaw and the last willing vessel went out of Massachusetts. Uh, as far as the United States goes in6742 1924, um, we do sell some elephant, which has to do with antique Chinese items and Japanese items.
Net ski things of that nature. But we follow the law explicitly. Some of our competitors on the whale ivory do not, but we do follow the law explicitly. As far as the federal guidelines in your state aspects seems to follow pretty much the federal guidelines. There are areas that are a little difficult, I think in which Mr. Thorne brought up is looking at a possible replacement on an6775 item. But you know, we do our best and I don't think the cases there are that extreme. So, I just, my main thing is kind of full warning down the road here is something6786 going to pop up and become a difficult issue for us in the business. Um, and people who have had family collections, uh, items that they are trying to put Children through college things of this nature. So that's primarily my point is more to the avenue of people going forward with making it more difficult for people in the antique trades to follow the laws but make it impossible to carry on their business because then the law has become too prohibitive. I think that's all I have to say and I appreciate the opportunity to speak.
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you Mr Born, we appreciate your testimony. Are there any questions from committee members for Mr born Seeing none. I thank you for testifying sir and you can still submit written testimony if you like. Okay, thank you so much. Sure there's a custom in the state house where legislators are able to be taken out of turn due to their busy schedules, especially today since we're currently in session. Um and I understand what Dubois is here to speak as well on testifying.
[REP DUBOIS:][HB890] Hi chair Domb, I'm happy to be here with all of you in the committee and I appreciate you taking the time out of your day to, have this hearing. Um Michelle Dubois I represent Brockton West Bridgewater and East Bridgewater for the 10th Plymouth district. And this is um most like I want to say it's the third session I have filed um this in its house bill House 890 and it's um we call it the beagle bill but what it really does is it allows um6884 it requires testing facilities in Massachusetts to6888 um have their veterinarian look over all the cats and dogs that um that they test on and if they think that they can be adopted out. Um The MSPCA has agreed to facilitate the adoption um with no liability to the company of any and all cats and dogs that um any testing facility in Massachusetts6910 has that their veterinarian certifies um can be adopted. So you know, if someone6918 wanted to um say get a veterinarian, if they would be willing to do that to say6922 every single dog cannot be adopted is not healthy enough. I guess they could do that. But in other states where this law has been um already passed, what it really does, it just creates a government, government oversight and the creation of the lack of liability for the corporations to work with the nonprofit and adopt out beagles and cats that that could otherwise um be adopted out when their time in the testing lab is done.
This is all dictated by the company, they make6955 these decisions about when, when the animal can no longer be part of a testing regime. So, um, I think it's a wonderful bill. I hope that some of the animal advocates have already um testified. Has that already happened? Hope it has. Yes, I don't believe we've heard completely, but we are in the midst so this isn't this, this has already passed in other states and I really hope that this session will be able to get it out of committee. I know the chairwoman has every bit of understanding. Um, Chairwoman Dykema chair Dykema about house 901 which I6994 also want to plug, it's the same similar bill also a beagle bill. So I'm hoping it can get out of the committee. Thank you very much.
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you so much Rep. Are7005 there any questions for rep Dubois from members of the committee? Seeing none. I thank you and I thank you for stopping and testifying today. Good to see you. Um we're returning back to our scheduled speakers. I'm wondering if Benjamin Karo kari kovach is here no spencer. Gordon I'm here. Great spencer Gordon Uh no, this is Benjamin Kharkov. Good welcome, please, awesome. Thank you. Mhm. Um yeah, I my
[BENJAMIN KIRACOFE (TIGER EYE FINE ):][HB903][SB576] um you just heard my name um I'm testifying in opposition to H 903 and S 576. specifically that prehistoric mammoth ivory is included in the definition of ivory being banned as I'm generally in support of the ban on elephant and rhino. Um I'm the co owner of Tigers.Eye Fine imports with my father, Brian Kiracofe who is a Newport's scrimshanders for over 30 years. We specialize in the nautical charts of scrimshaw and Nantucket basket weaving accessories for the purpose of carrying on these historical traditions. Mammoth tusk material provides an irreplaceable ethical alternative to elephant ivory because mammoths have been extinct for thousands of years. Mammoth ivory is of no harm material, a, dinosaur fossil that helps to keep alive. The coast of folk art traditions like scrimshaw. Nantucket basket weaving and more that have enriched Massachusetts and New England since the late 16 hundreds.
Our customers in Massachusetts are thrilled to purchase mammoth7099 ivory goods because we can still create the traditional artworks. They love utilizing an ethical alternative to elephant ivory. And I would love to encourage open conversation around ways that we can certify the7111 authenticity of newly created mammoth products rather than a simple outright banned lumping it in with elephant and rhino. I'm all for protecting the elephants that are alive today. And that's why I feel that banning mammoth is a poor choice. Um the longstanding global interest7127 in ivory products isn't going to disappear overnight and since mammoth ivory is a viable alternative, its presence in the market acts as a primary deterrent away from element elephant. The main argument against mammoth ivory is based on the belief that it can't be distinguished from elephant ivory. However, fish and wildlife clearly states on its website and its forensics laboratory publications. And I did note section that mammoth ivory can be distinguished from elephant ivory um using the Schrager lines and also potentially UV light to determine iron phosphate inclusions.
And I do understand the one woman's argument that it can be very difficult to do this, especially for finished pieces and I understand that however, I'm in the business of creating new pieces, Michael Vienneau as well. My father as well. We're creating new pieces of artworks. And so I don't see why there, there can't be a way that we could potentially vet the sourcing process that we go through in order to get certified in using uh certified authentic mammoth ivory. Uh for example, the sources that I work7197 with, um I personally vet myself and they get the materials directly from native Alaskans in the tundra of Alaska and it's, I've personally handled up to 1000 pounds of the material myself. It's very obviously uh old darker, It's darker in hue. It's old material that has tans and browns and yellows. It's riddled with cracks. Um It's very different than elephant ivory, which is a much wider and much more solid material.
Um and even if I'm not important to personally authenticated. Um uh what about trying to have legislation that can work with my my sources to help ah provide authenticity through, through literally the people that are digging it up out of the ground because obviously if it's being dug up out of the ground, we know for certain that it is mammoth ivory rather than something that uh rather than elephant, which isn't being dug up from the ground. I'm sorry if I a little wasn't the best presentation, but that's all I have. The last thing I'll say is that banning this would have a drastic economic impact on my business. My father's business and many businesses like ours, uh that have many, many customers in Massachusetts. So thank you so much for your time.
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you. And again, you're welcome. Everyone is welcome to submit written testimony and there is no limit on written testimony as there is on oral. Um Are there7284 any questions from committee members? Mr Korolkov seeing none. I thank you for your testimony sir. Um I just want to recognize some of the representatives that are joining us. Representative Gentile from Sudbury Representative Giannino from revere Representative Carey from East Hampton and the the ranking member representative. Orrall from Lakeville. Welcome everybody. Um, Spencer Gordon Are you here? I am, I am here. Can you hear me? Yes, I can. Great. Please start your testimony.
[SPENCER GORDON (SPENCER MARKS):][SB576][HB903] Thank you. My name is Spencer Gordon I am half of Spencer Marks. We are antique dealers specializing in silver and we've been doing this for about 35 years. This is the fourth session that this bill has been introduced. No one likes to see the horrors of the illegal slaughter of elephants by poachers, but we have consistently asked that if we must have a law here, it matches the federal rules and regulations so that we can have one set of rules to follow while this bill is closer to the federal rules7352 than the original one. This bill fails the test first. The definition of ivory in the Massachusetts. Bill bans elephant ivory and mammoth and mastodon on as well. Federal laws do not prohibit these extinct species today. Scrimshanders as we've been hearing. Use ethical mammoth tusks in their craft and this deviation from federal law would harm them and the galleries who represent them. The art of scrimshaw has been practiced here for longer than there has been a Commonwealth. We should be supporting the scrimshanders in their galleries.
Secondly, this bill restricts museum purchases beyond federal law. Museums have curators, directors, acquisition committees and trustees who develop acquisition policy and approve purchases. They should be allowed to do their job without further restrictions from the Commonwealth. Lastly, this bill allows the destruction of confiscated authentic antiques, which is which everyone in the art and antiques world is entirely against the ravages of time. Take7423 enough with it. Time doesn't need our help. I became a dealer because the stories these objects carry with them. Excite and inspire me when we sell something, we find it a happy new home. One where it may be appreciated for a few years or a few generations home where it's stories will continue to inspire future generations. We believe in a world that includes both elephants and antiques. Future generations deserve no less. This bill will do little to help elephants and much harm to small businesses. Please oppose it or re or amended. Thank you very much.
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you very much. Mr Gordon and thank you for your patience and waiting. You've been here for the whole time. Are there any questions from any other committee members for mr Jordan seeing none. I thank you for your testimony, sir. Thank you, john mcguinness frank McNamee and Bill Feeney I'm just going to go back and ask a couple of names that were in the beginning of this section. Alan Graham, be Andrew Jacobson scott different. Okay everybody. Okay we're going to move on to H. 9 17 and act relative to. I'm sorry my name was on the list to speak. Um this johanna McBrien and I haven't been asked to speak So the particular bill we have. Yes please on the uh the House Bill 903. > You say your name again please? Ohana jail. H. A. N. N. A. Nick brian M. C. B. R. I. E. N. I don't see you on the list. Um Just wait one second please. Sure, Shannon Shannon put me on on the list and I appreciate that. Sorry for7544 the late entry we got. Thank you very much. Yes please. So here I go.
[JOHANNA MCBRIEN (DHSM):][HB903][SB576] All right, so good afternoon again. My name is Johanna McBrien. I'm the executive director of the Dedham Historical Society and Museum and consulting editor of Antiques and Fine Art magazine. I'm here to speak in opposition of house Bill 903. I'm quite aware of the destructive effects that. House. Bill 903 and S. 576. And others like them have had on museums, antiques, dealers, auction houses, collectors and um Craftspeople. I've spent more than 30 years in these arenas. In addition to being a historian. House Bill 903 and S 576 are too restrictive and should not include antique ivory and it's definition as noted in the bill, there are many decorative arts and furniture items made in the 20th century, for7594 example, and earlier made with ivory that will be adversely affected by this bill. There's no question that elephants alive today must be safe from harm to destroy history. However, by destroying antiques or restricting trade of such items is overreach and unnecessary and harmful businesses, collectors, museums and craftspeople. Too many historic items have already been destroyed because they contain more than 50% of ivory, for example, or de Minimus.
In this bill for instance, the definition of ivory includes mammoth and mastodon, which7621 scrimshanders as we've heard in carver such as Mr. Vienneau and Mr. Kiracofe noted. Who use ivory who used rather mastodon and mammoth instead of ivory, Limiting this option is hurtful. Such livelihoods. In addition, lines 57-60 note restrictions7636 related to the import purchase, sale or possession with intent to sell ivory or rhinoceros horn with indiscriminate dates of 1991, 2020 goes7644 beyond the federal law as Spencer Gordon noted out. This bill will7648 hamper the ability of museums to make our7650 own decisions about what we buy or acquire what we sell or the accession. This will also hamper our ability to present exhibits, build collections and7658 loan or borrow materials. The role of the museum's education and this bill is too restricted on museums, The bill also allows for the destruction of confiscated materials. This is horrific since ivory is a common component of antiques, not only an historic materials.
Not only will this bill damage the livelihoods of antiques dealers and auction houses but will result in the destruction of this nation's history. This bill is too restrictive and must not be passed as written again. There's no question that the living elephants and rhinos7685 today must be protected and should be that ivory buys definition in the law and antiques should not be included in this bill and the bill should be amended. So thank you very much for your time.
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you very much. Are there any questions from committee members? Seeing none. I thank you for your time and appreciate your testimony. Herrick off here. Yes,7709 I am okay. And I understand you would like to submit testimony as well. Yes, please please start.
[BRIAN KIRACOFE (TIGER EYE FINE):][HB903][SB576] Thank you. I'm In Opposition of a Senate 576 and House 903. Um, I've and agreeing with a lot of the presenters beforehand. My son was one of7735 them and articulated our feelings very well in the sense that I'm a scrimshaw artist. I've been making scrim shells for over 40 years now and my store in Newport Rhode island, but I worked with Michael Vienneau and a lot of the artists and so on. Nantucket and in Massachusetts and this bill if including lily mammoth ivory would really hurt business. It would hurt the art. Um, this art is well over 200 years old and we are doing our best to evolve and to work with materials that, you know, are sustainable, such as the mammoth ivory. So it's to me it's the baby with the bathwater.7782 If you put that in and you're just eliminating all ivory that people will find a way to, to work around it and probably get illegal ivory's where the mammoth is perfectly, you know, material that we can work with. It's a beautiful material. It's obviously not hurting animals and the federal law covers that.
So the federal law, it allows us to work with7813 the mammoth ivory. I think this bill, if it took mammoth out, we were all for it. No one wants to see the elephant population, you know, go extinct. And the rhinos as well. There's, you know, no reason for it, from our point of view. Uh, and that's pretty much it appreciate the opportunity.
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you so much, sir. Are there any questions from members of the committee? Seeing none? I thank you for your testimony. We appreciate you being here. Thanks Sean flaherty. I believe your audio issues have may be resolved. Are you there? Mhm Maybe7856 not. Can you hear me now? Yes, I can please introduce yourself and let us know what you will be testifying on. Great, Thank you. I apologize for the audio issues earlier.
[SEAN FLAHERTY (CONCERNED CITIZEN):][HB890] My name is Sean Flaherty and I'm an attorney, but more importantly, I'm a former state legislator from the great state of Maine. So I understand the committee's job dealing with this particular issue that I'm testifying on, which is 8 90 the companion house bills and the Senate bill regarding the research, animals protection. Um, I'm here today because I adopted a Beagle that was in a research facility in Massachusetts for7898 the 1st 3.5 years of its life. I worked with an organization called Beagle Freedom Project, which was able to set me up as a foster. Um, and I'm a foster fail. I took an animal. Her name is Agatha that did not have a name before who spent her entire7916 life in a cage and when she was released, she had never touched grass, she had never seen the sun. She didn't know how to drink water out of a bowl because they were fed through gerbil feeders or rabbit feeders and over months and now years she has become a real dog. Um, so I know for a fact having worked with this group, Beagle freedom project and being adopter myself that the animals that don't need to be euthanized, you can go on to have a very normal canine life.
One of the former senator's noted that they live their first lives not necessarily hospitable conditions. The conditions are terrible. They're in cages. They don't lives not necessarily hospitable conditions. The conditions are terrible. They're in cages. They don't know what the outside, they don't know human7961 touch for anything other than needles and pain. So when he said that they get and they deserve a second. Um, life, the truth is they didn't have a life before. So they're really getting a second chance at having a real life and I intend to submit written testimony and you can see and hear from my family's perspective of what a incredible dog Agatha has become become. She's been out of the cage now longer than she was in the cage. Uh, and I really hope Massachusetts joins a number of other states in passing this bill to allow7997 those dogs that don't need to be euthanized to be placed appropriately in a home.
This8005 bill is straightforward. It's wisely words and it's very carefully crafted protecting the liability of the medical research facilities. But more importantly, giving dogs mostly beagles the second chance at a real life. Thank you, madam, Chair and the committee and I appreciate your help in getting my, my big lag of this story out.
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you so much for sharing it with us. And again, you can submit written testimony if you like. I can't help but think that I got has kind of found a lucky match their um are there any questions from members of the committee? Sena and I thank you for your testimony sir. We're going to move to another piece of legislation under consideration. H 9 17 and act relevant relative to dogs brought into the commonwealth by animal rescue organizations is Ronnie candle in here. I am. Hello. Hello, good afternoon. Um, we're going to hear earlier. Um, test witnesses have about up to three minutes. There's a chime that will go off but have no limit on written testimony. So if you end up being able to finish, we invite your written testimony. Okay.
RONNI CANDLEN (CONCERNED CITIZEN):][HB917] I'm a little choked up over Agatha, but we'll get my name is Ronni Candlen Um, I live in Canton Massachusetts and nearly 10 years ago I first became involved in rescue. That's when my eyes were opened to the mass of animal overpopulation problem in the southern part of the US. The number of dogs and cats killed in shelters just because they are full is staggering. Many rescue groups who raced to save these animals transport them to other parts of the country, including New England in Massachusetts. We are so lucky to have many responsible pet owners here who spay neuter and care for their animals. So we don't have the massive overpopulation problems that states in the south do so. Our local shelters are not overflowing with adoptable dogs. Yes, there is a huge demand for adoptable dogs in Massachusetts. Our state is a critical lifeline for these dogs and cats. There are hundreds of families who would like nothing more than to adopt one of these animals, but dozens of rescue groups face an unnecessary hurdle and red tape from the Massachusetts Department of Agriculture and it's regulations that prohibit the rescues from adopting into the state.
This has to end One of the most onerous is the regulation that requires dogs be quarantined for 48 hours in a state regulated facility. This is cost prohibitive for many rescues. There are not enough of these facilities and many of them are not even working with new rescues and furthermore, there are countless stories of these dogs picking up kennel cough and other infections by being housed in these facilities. The dogs are transported across the country which is stressful mentally and physically and then to live in a kennel life. Quarantine facility for two days creates even more stress on the animal. The rescue that I volunteer for is adopting approximately 70% fewer dogs by not adopting to Massachusetts residents and therefore we cannot save as many dogs. That means more dogs die in8194 shelters In Connecticut, it was mentioned before. Dogs do not have to quarantine for 40 hours in8199 a kennel and we don't hear of massive outbreaks of parvo or distemper there. They require dogs get health certificates from veterinarian after they arrive, but the dogs can go straight to the adopter or foster's home to quarantine.
We do think the requirements for dogs and cats to be vaccinated and have health certificates and microchips before they leave on transport and arrive in our state should continue. That is very important, but it's time to stop crowding already stressed out dogs in an expensive quarantine facility, they can quarantine in an adopter of foster's Homes and8232 then be seen by veterinarian. This would allow more, many more lives to be saved as well as provide an easier transition for the dogs in beginning their new lives. Thank you so much for your consideration and support of this bill.
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you so much for your testimony. Are there any questions from members of the committee? Seeing none. I thank you8252 for your testimony and for your willingness to share it with us today. Um, is Aramis Jordan here. Yeah. Krista ruby lisa lambert. Yes, I'm here baked. Are you on camera lisa? Uh, I thought it was, let me, I see you. Great. Okay. Well I8278 guess. Huh?
[LISA LAMBERT (CONCERNED CITIZEN):][HB917] Okay. I'm also testifying8286 um, in support of House 917, an act relative to dogs brought into the Commonwealth by animal rescue organizations. My name is Lisa Lambert and I live in Melrose Massachusetts. The hat I'm wearing today as I talk to you is someone who has fostered dogs for almost 10 years in that time. About 17 dogs and puppies have landed in my house. They've learned a lot from my own two amazing dogs and gone on the successful adoptions when the dogs arrive they're. Often fearful, exhausted and confused. Um, they, that doesn't last long because I have a warm home, lots of interaction with me and my two very stable dogs and a lot of options for them if they want to just tuck themselves away and messed. In8330 addition, I can observe them for any behavior or health problems if that's needed. Like most people who foster, I have a full time job which has been primarily remote since COVID. I'm in the dog park committee in my town and I write an occasional post for my own dog blog. Beginning in June 2020, I noticed the new regulations for out of state rescues stopped many rescues from adopting dogs to families in Massachusetts. This was the middle of the pandemic at a time when many people were working at8357 home and thought they could get a dog the time and attention that it needed. A friend of mine works for missing dogs, Massachusetts and she told me about several people that she knows who fell in love with dogs. They saw online only to read that that rescue no longer adopted to Massachusetts residents.
What changed? They wondered, one8375 of the things that changed was that rescues now had to quarantine dogs for 48 hours in a facility in Massachusetts. After that they would see a veterinarian and as Ronni mentioned, were totally in favor of dogs being able to see a veterinarian and have a good health check. And I think that was spoken to by Cathy Martin as well and we're totally in support of that. The quarantine requirement was new. However many of our state rescues tried to find8402 a facility, but it's difficult to find one. Most of them are already booked up. Dogs would come into the state have had a long, long transport and they're exhausted and often confused instead of landing in a home like mine with the other friendly dogs, their quarantine and a facility um, that's isolated and the environment is, it's not a good choice for the dog. Sometimes not for the new adopter either who8423 meets a dog who is now doubly stressed and confused. First by a long transport and then by quarantine. My dogs by the way have loved having these new cool dogs come and stay for a while and I think they kind of miss that. That's not how.
So H 917 would leave in place the 48 hour quarantine but change the location so that that quarantine would be in the home of a foster like me or the new adoptive. I want to end by telling one story. There's a man I see in my local dog park and he has a8453 great dane dog if you don't know great danes. Their really big dogs and Scooby doo is modeled after them. This man told me he had had great danes all his life and he always stopped adopted from a great dane rescue in Maine because there is not one in Massachusetts. He believes in adoption and he loves great danes that rescues website has quietly changed their language to say that they only adopt dog in Massachusetts and in new Hampshire, so I'm just going to stop there heard the bell and I want to say thank you very much for listening and a chance to talk about this today.
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you very much for your testimony. Remember you can still submit testimony in writing if you have more to say we don't want to look at you in writing, I plan to thank you. Are there any questions from members of8498 the committee seeing that? I thank you for your testimony. I welcome back Chair Dykema um to our hearing, I'm going to call for H 9 49 and act protecting dogs at boarding kennels and daycare facilities. If Allison blank is here, Alison, I think you might be muted. I think I am a muted now. Okay, I don't know if you heard earlier but oral testimony is limited to three minutes. They'll be like a time that's very relaxing. But it's your indication that the time is up but you're not limited and written testimony.
[ALLISON BLANCK (ARL):][HB949][SB582][SB595] Thank you so much. My name is Allison Blanck. I am director of advocacy for the Animal Rescue League of Boston. I will be briefly testifying on a number of bills First H 949 S 582 and S 595. These bills all have slightly different8551 language but generally they have the same intent to provide some much needed regulation to the pet day care industry. These facilities, they have substantially increase in numbers in recent years, but they operate without state oversight. These so called doggie daycares often only require a local level kennel a license. The only standard of this is that these be sanitary and humane. There are no standards regarding building requirements, dog to staff ratios or supervision. This lack of regulation has tragically resulted in the injury and death of many dogs. Across Massachusetts arrows. Law enforcement regularly receives calls from pet parents whose animals have been injured or killed with these facilities or those who just don't know if the things they are saying is industry standard or if there's someone else they can reach out to for oversight.
As others have said, we know that the pandemic has resulted in a substantial increase in pet ownership and that the demand for these pet daycares will increase as folks go back to the office until their statewide regulation. The unfortunate reality is8606 that pet parents are the ones who have to determine how safe the facility8609 is often something that people don't find out until an incident occurs. Similar types of animal facilities where a large number of dogs mingles such as pet shops and shelters are in fact regulated by and are they believe that common sense regulation on key safety and animal health areas will help protect both these pets and the employees who work there. A version of these bills was reported out favorably last session and we do ask for a favorable report again this session. The other bill I will briefly testify on is S 5838637 which has to do with animal welfare and safety programming. The Massachusetts animal fund is a crucial part of enabling animal health throughout Massachusetts.
This bill would divert certain agricultural finds into the mass animal fund. This fund provides really important spay neuter and vaccines to in deed animals across the commonwealth as well as training for animal control officers who are doing a lot of this work in communities. Again, we will be submitting more comprehensive written testimony on both these and other bills in front of the committee. Thank you so much for your time and um thank you for the opportunity to testify.
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you and came in right under three minutes. So your great um is there any questions from members of the committee Seeing none. I thank you for your testimony and appreciate your time. Thank you. Representative Madam Chair, thank you. Chair Domb appreciate the vice chair filling in so ably um doing a great job. Um We would now like to welcome testimony on House 965 and Senate 623 an act prohibiting the sale of fur products and the first um presenters we have a part of a panel which includes Sadie buckle, Stephanie Harris, Lizza8714 Oliver and Gail Hansen Um and then for the edification of all of you who are still waiting to testify. We very much appreciate your patients by my reading. We have, including the current panelists. We have 23 additional folks left to testify this evening. So again, appreciate your patients and I don't know who was planning to start off the panel, but I guess I will defer to the panel and in setting up its order of presentation,
[STEPHANIE HARRIS (ALDF):][HB965][SB623] I'm happy to kick us off. Good afternoon chairs, Dykema chair, Rausch and members of the committee. My name is Stephanie Harris. I'm testifying in support of House Bill 965 and Senate Bill 623 on behalf of the Animal Legal Defense Fund of the estimated 100 million animals killed for their fur each year worldwide. The vast majority are raised on fur farms, often in factory8765 firm like conditions, most in china in the US fur farms, most in the west8770 and Midwest produced nearly three million mink fur pelts each year, although the last fur farm in Massachusetts closed more than a decade ago. The Commonwealth continues to drive the demand for fur most of our stores selling fur or selling a small number of accessories which should be easily replaceable with non fur alternatives. Recent data reveals fur sales represent8789 less than a half of a percent of the state's8792 overall retail sales. Yet Massachusetts represents 5% of all fur sales nationwide. A Massachusetts sales ban on new fur products, clothing, fashion, accessories, and home décor would make a meaningful impact, likely saving millions of animals from lifelong suffering on fur farms for the sake of fashion.
Existing laws do not effectively address the animal suffering or environmental or public health risks from farming these8816 un domesticated animals, minks, foxes, chinchillas and other fur bears. At the federal level, there is legislation requiring truthful fur products, labeling and import bans on products with fur from dogs, cats and seals. However, neither the Animal Welfare Act nor the Humane methods of slaughter Act extend to animals farmed for their fur federal laws that can protect certain fur bearing animals in the wild, also failed to protect these animals who are farmed. Other jurisdictions though, have taken effective action over the past two decades, 20 countries have adopted production bans prohibiting fur farming altogether or for certain species, or establishing such strict regulations that the practices effectively ended considering the scale and geography of the fur farming industry fur sales bans are uniquely effective. After four California cities passed such local laws, the state8866 followed suit in 2019, 2 of those local laws were challenged in court and upheld as constitutional.
In 2020 Wellesley Massachusetts passed the first in the nation and outside of California sales ban, which was then approved by the Attorney8880 General's Office. In8881 2021 Weston followed suit, as did Ann Arbor Michigan and Israel. The U. K. Is considering a similar ban, the legislation before you would phase out the sale of new fur products, clothing, fashion, accessories, and home décor. It includes common sense exemptions for secondhand or used fur fur used by native Americans and fur from domestic species typically raised for food production. It does not impact leather or shearling or taxidermy. It would not prevent hunters and trappers from selling raw fur pelts to dealers and other intermediaries. It would not prevent furriers from continuing to clean repair and store for items for customers. It only affects the sale of new finished fur products. The phase out period would allow retailers to sell off any fur inventory and modify or diversify their business practices.
There are a growing number of products on the market with innovative materials that have the look more than feel of animal fur without the cruelty. Thank you for your time and consideration of this important animal protection legislation. consideration of this important animal protection legislation. Mhm. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you is um the next, I guess Sadie will call Sadie buckles is the next uh presenter.
[SADIE BUCKLES (PETA):][HB965][SB623] Good afternoon and thank you for this opportunity to provide testimony today. My name is Sadie Buckles, and I'm an assistant campaign manager for PETA, which has8960 over 123,000 members and supporters in the state of Massachusetts. I urge you to support S 623 H 965, which would ban the sale of new fur products in the Commonwealth. The vast majority of the world's fur comes from animals living in cages on fur factory farms for decades. PETA entities, undercover investigations that these facilities have proved repeatedly that intense suffering filthy conditions, horrific violence and killing are pervasive in the fur industry. Our latest fur industry expose revealed that animals were kept in dirty wire mesh cages and the intensive confinement caused some of the animals to exhibit symptoms of psychosis or captivity induced insanity, which includes frantic incessant pacing, circling and gnawing on cage bars. Workers were seen bludgeoning rabbits with a metal pipe and hacking off their heads while they were still conscious and one chinchilla screamed and struggled for over a minute during a botched electrocution.
Afterward, a worker crudely broke the live chinchilla's neck on fur farms in Michigan and California. PETA also found workers electrocuting chinchillas without stunning them. So they were conscious as they experience the electrocution and the pain of a full blown heart attack. animals at these facilities are frequently denied veterinary care. One chinchilla farm owner admitted to amputating animals injured limbs with wire cutters and using drops9045 of brandy to anesthetize them in Wisconsin, workers grabbed terrified screaming minks by the tail and stuffed up to 30 of them at a time into a metal drum with carbon monoxide pumped in from a running engine in order to gas them to death. The cruelty that PETA has exposed of these facilities is typical of fur farms everywhere, but animals who are caught in traps fare no better. The steel draw trap remains one of the most widely used and it slammed shut on an animal's legs, They may lie in agony for days with broken legs, lacerations and hemorrhaging before the trapper returns to shoot bludgeon or kill them in some other violent way.
Given the9087 violence inherent in the fur trade, it's not surprising that public sentiment against the use of fur is growing around the world. That's why Canada Goose, Neiman, Marcus Macy's Ralph, Lauren, Calvin Klein and hundreds of other major designers and retailers have banned the use of fur in their designs. Massachusetts has the opportunity to set a compassionate example for others by passing a ban on fur sales. I urge you to support S 623 and H 965. Thank you.
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you, Liz Oliver, please.
[LIZA OLIVER (FUR-FREE MASSACHUSETTS):][SB623][HB965] Hello. My name is Liza Oliver. I am the founder of Fur-Free Massachusetts and the citizen who initiated what was the first and successful citizens petition in Massachusetts to ban fur sales at a local level. In Wellesley. I want to discuss the incredibly adverse environmental impacts of fur farms9142 and to do this. I'm drawing on to studies both by the Dutch independent environmental sustainability group CE Delft These studies are of Mink for which is the primary animal farm outside farm farm fur fur outside of china. The studies were consistent in their findings that for is the worst offending textile and all except one of the 18 categories considered for both synthetic and natural fibers. These categories included, land use, water use, carbon emissions from feed and manure toxicity, waste runoff and eutrophication. While the fur industry has touted that sustainability, the sustainability of its product, This is actually a claim that they have been banned from making by EU regulatory agencies because it's false.
The information in these studies demonstrates why, for example, the climate change impact of 1 pound of mink fur is at least three times higher than the highest scoring natural or synthetic textile that being wool due to the production of animal feed and manure emissions. One major region for the high climate impact is the huge amount of resources required to feed carnivorous animals, which produces only a negligible amount of product. in return To put this in perspective in order to produce just one kg of mink fur requires 563 kg of feed for tanning9226 and dressing contribute to environmental pollution with toxins such as chromium and formaldehyde. Used to prevent the skin from decaying, which is one of the major reasons for waste runoff in eutrophication as well. Additionally, for farms are consistently reported to violate environmental regulations. Recently. In addition to these environmental statistics, mink on hundreds of fur factory farms abroad and in the US tested positive for COVID 19.
fur farm animals are known carriers of corona viruses and research now shows that farmed mink have spread mutated viruses to humans, the only known animal to human transmission outside of the original COVID 19 SARS. To protect public health, several European governments decided to kill nearly 20 million mink at infected farms which still remain reservoirs for the virus France. And the Netherlands passed laws to ban fur farming as a result of this. But unfortunately there has been little action by the us government as the evidence makes clear the known detriments of this industry not only pertain to extreme animal cruelty but to environmental degradation and human health. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Okay, thank you very much. Miss Oliver, the remaining Panelist Gail Hansen, please. I don't think she was able to make it due to uh medical emergency. Okay, thank you. Are there any questions or comments from the committee members for any of the panelists? Seeing none. Thank you all for your testimony and your time today, I'd like now would like to welcome joseph O'neill if he is here. Yeah, joseph Gorman, wait, Jones feels here on the floor is yours?
[JOSEPH O'NEIL (CONCERNED CITIZEN):][HB965][SB623] All right. Um So9343 I'm against S. 623 and H 965. basically people, there's a lot of misunderstanding about the fur market and9353 what actually entails and9354 wildfire does make up the fur market and there's there's communities out there that rely on this, I'm gonna get emotional because I'm deeply connected to these people out here. But the Inuit when you ban9368 sand seal fur in the 70s, they ran into a deep deep depression. Suicide rates are out of control drug alcoholism murdered and missing indigenous women and Children. All those rates are out of control. Sorry. Um I got some quotes from the Toronto Star when this first came about. Um If the ban goes ahead, people will die in our community noting that suicide rate is climbing and alcoholism and as is alcoholism that was sent that was said by a a Cree chief named Ignus Gill. Mhm. Um. Mhm. These communities they rely these remote. In my in my written testimony I submitted a picture that my friend sent me of a carving pumpkin that cost them $66.
It's food prices in those regions are so ridiculously expensive that they rely on the income from these fur pellets that they sell raw and they even make their own fur garments but it's been so stigmatized that they can't move the move them um they can't even sell9438 them internationally. Um So now it really upsets me that you're trying to impose this on the rest of their products that they can create. Um You know I got a hat here that I made. All right is made from raccoon that I harvested myself um attended a traditional make muay that I've learned over over the years. And an Inuit helped me designed the pattern myself and and skin. So it um what I make isn't unethical. It's deep in my culture. It's something I'm very in touch with. Help me connect to the land. Um And I don't see why you have to ban the products that I make. Thank you
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
thank you Mr O neill appreciate your testimony. Are there any comments or questions from committee members seeing none. I would like to call joseph O. Gorman if he is with us. Mr O. Gorman. Randi. Oh hello. Welcome. Yeah we can through you. Hello can you hear me? We can yeah
[BRIAN O'GORMAN (CONCERNED CITIZEN):][SB623][HB965] just a little mirth into this. It used to be the uh the fashion industry. If a man wore socks and sandals that you could laugh about it. But now we have uh9525 Rico guided had a HSUS telling us that it's not appropriate fashion. Can you see this? Can you see my can you see my coyote skin that I have here? Look look here look here. Farm fur animals received9542 excellent care, freedom. They express natural behaviors. Mink and fox death. Well to life on the farm. Yeah they are not killed inhumanely. Look look here fur farming has standard guidelines for the operation of mink farms in the United States. Many farmers maybe a very small minority in Massachusetts. A minority. A minority we're Republic we're democracy. We're supposed to respect the rights of people if they want to have a for farm. If they're an FFA Future Farmers of America or for its members that won't have a small Minnick ranch in their backyard. Why are these people9589 trying to stop it because they don't like it. Their Worldview says no you can't have it. My Worldview says yeah9598 I can't have it. So what do we do?
What we're going to we're going to put the furriers out of business, to furriers from Maine or to Waltham on 1 17 where I grew up, it used to supply the couriers in Boston with something. I just don't think you can do this. How can you do this? How can you deny the rights of the minority whose any other minority? You'll be all up in arms. Thank you. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you. Mr O. Gorman, appreciate your testimony. Are there any comments or questions from committee members? Seeing none, I'd like to call randy Richard. Randi Richard, thank you. How about Mike Brown is Mr Brown here. Mhm.
[MIKE BROWN (NATURAL FIBRE ALLIANCE):][HB965][SB623] Yes, madam Chair, Good evening everyone. My name is Mike Brown, I'm the head of sustainability and public affairs with the Natural Fibre Alliance. Thank you so much for the opportunity to9666 comment on both HB 965 and SB 623. Um An act to prohibit the sale of fur the Natural Fibre Alliances an Environmental Justice9675 Coalition comprised of producers and associations that support the use of natural sustainable materials and clothing, accessories and other9683 goods. Now we oppose this bill for several reasons. First, this bill infringes on Personal choice. What9689 clothing a person chooses to wear is a private and personal decision, what we wear is an expression of ourselves as individuals. There is no movement from the public to have the government regulate what people can and cannot wear. This bill is the work of a very small group of individuals who have made it no secret that they want to ban leather wool and silk. We should not go9710 down the slippery slope of inserting the government in the people's closets. Second banning natural fibers such as fur a harm current efforts to improve environmental sustainability. Uh, natural fibres provide a viable biodegradable alternative to synthetic materials associated with landfills. Microplastics over consumption and pollution fur products are long lasting and made to a circular rather than linear model in which products can be reused, remodeled and recycled.
People cherish high quality9742 natural fiber clothing and contrast9744 the plastic based synthetic fires, which are part of the throwaway mindset of fast fashion that creates pollution and consumer waste. Lastly, animal activists have been found repeatedly to exaggerate on fabricated claims over the past year. Much has been made of mixed9760 acceptability to COVID After initial farm infections. In early fall of 2020, the virus has not and I repeat, has not been detected in9770 any US mink since early January, strict biosecurity protocols have been implemented and all farm owners and make handlers have been vaccinated. Additionally, the industry is utilized over 3.5 million doses of mink vaccine developed by Zoetis, the world's largest producer animal vaccines. Lastly, please don't fall for the misinformation. This bill is an overreach and a personal choice closes9796 Massachusetts small businesses that sell both fur and fur trend and does not serve the public interest.
Hence the reason the overwhelming majority of Massachusetts residents voted no when asked that new first sales should be banned in a Boston globe article in early April. So once again, when when the opportunity hopefully isn't presented to look at this bill any further, you all do the right thing and look9821 at the science as opposed to the emotion. Thanks so much.
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you Mr Brown. And if you'd like to submit some of that, those facts and figures by a written testimony that the committee would certainly make sure to review that information. Are there any9839 questions9839 or comments from committee members seeing none? I'd invite chalice Hobbs to present please.
[CHALLIS HOBBS (FUR COMMISSION USA):][HB965][SB623] Yeah, I'm Challis Hobbs and uh so I represent the Fur Commission U.S.A I'm the assistant director and so my role is I am the voice and representation for these US fur farmers. I'm the fourth generation in my in my family to actually be in the fur industry. Um I was educated at numerous universities. I have my master's in business and right now I talk to a lot of the farmers and we are opposed obviously to this bill both of these bills and what a little bit about us and the message that the farmers want to present to you is that it is a humane and the animals are well cared for in our industry and that's one of the moan, the main motivating reasons I decided to take this role is because I did see a lot of misinformation from activists about our industry. We have a we have a9911 certification program, the farmers which I represent and I visited these9915 farms hundreds of times. I know them from childhood relationships all the way to now. And and part of the certification that these farms are under is that it covers housing of the animals. It covers food and water, um covers vet care and also the euthanasia again, misinformation the that I heard9941 earlier presented by the side that's advocating this is that these animals are euthanized with carbon monoxide.
It's a painless and odorless process and I've seen it myself. I have observed it and in my opinion and it is humane furthermore, I just wanted to say like these farmers and you know, they see themselves as sustainable in our9965 community and in the US, a lot of this9968 food that comes to these these fur bearing animals is actually byproducts from us. So any poultry or eggs or if you look at beef, anything like that that we won't consume as humans is recycled and consumed through these fur growing animals. Um in regarding COVID, I know that's been brought up a couple of times. This just shows the ethic and the character of9994 the farmers, they've actually we've actually had 3.5 million doses of COVID administered, to these these animals and we've had. it's been over almost 10 months and10003 there's been no cases detected of10006 COVID on these on these fur farms. Also, you know,10008 there's, I just talked to family10010 yesterday to have an 82 year10012 old grandfather has been10013 double vaccinated, he's there10014 with his son and his grandson working on these farms and they love it, they wake up and10018 they10019 love10020 taking10021 care of this animals. This is their passion. And but that's that's the message10024 I want to10025 give to you guys is10026 that it is humane if you guys do need additional information, I'm here for it. So thank you.10033
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Okay, thank you Mr Hobson. I also extend the10036 invitation to10037 you to submit any written10039 testimony um, for the committee's review. Are there any questions or10045 comments from committee members Seeing none. I'd like to welcome Ryan Moyle. Just hello, can you hear me? We can welcome. Yes,
[RYAN MOYLE (MOYLE MINK AND TANNERY):][HB965][SB623] Thank10054 you so much for the opportunity to speak. Um, it's actually kind of a pleasure to uh, to address in Massachusetts as I'm a graduate10061 from Babson College and enjoyed my time there.10064 Um, I am Ryan Moyle And I'm the CEO of Moyle Mink and Tannery continuing multi10069 generation family business. I'm speaking out against House 96510074 and10074 Senate Bill 623 and I10075 want to specifically10076 address the10077 environmental and cultural impacts the proponents of the bill uh would have you believe10082 that fur processing processing the animals. It's bad for the environment. I'm here to10086 refute those claims, in fact, the opposite. I own the factory. I know exactly10091 what we do, what chemicals, chemicals, what chemicals go into it. Their claims are patently false, their made10099 up unlike traditional leather tanning our processes,10102 natural environmentally sound and10103 environmentally superior to the production of10105 any synthetic fiber and10106 not only for and10107 synthetic for, but all synthetic clothing. On May 10 2020 the Idaho Department10112 of Environmental Quality audit the influence from our tannery. After exhaustive analysis. They concluded that we were not a10118 significant industrial user and the10119 DEQ will no longer maintain control authority of our facility.
They came to the conclusion that our waste stream was so clean, they're not even10127 going to come10128 back. They've excused us. They're not even going to look at our10131 factory again in the future. And the most amazing part about that is10134 I don't even have10135 to pre treat my water before it goes to the city. And let me explain to you10140 why while proponents would have10141 you believe10142 that we use toxic chemicals. That's not the truth. The primary element used to tan for10148 is Alum, and what10149 else is Alum used for? It is used in cooking to make pickles, so you eat it. Its use an antiperspirant, so you10155 rub it on your bodies. It's10157 even used as an adjuvant in vaccines10160 to promote stronger immune response. So you10162 injected into your body's. However,10164 most important to this discussion is Alum, in its various forms that10169 comes in, is used to purify drinking water and waste municipal waste treatment facilities around10175 the world.
They add this chemical to water, adjust the10178 ph it binds with the10180 microscopic toxins that10182 come from other factories, gives them molecular way and then they10185 are removed by daft and it helps clean the10187 water to make clean drinking water. So I don't have to10189 take it out of my influence because it goes into the process that it's actually used to clean the water.10196 This is incredibly clean. They don't want you to believe10198 it, but10200 it is the truth now, contrast10205 62% Of all. Where is that?10208 62%. Which means this entire argument that we couldn't where there has only been around since we put in the oil wells.10215 When the oil wells went10216 in, they came in and said no, we want10217 to get rid of fur because we have alternatives. It's very funny10220 that in the food industry and everywhere else,10222 they say, we want to10223 go back to natural products,10224 let's get rid of10225 preservatives, let's get rid of all these other things.10227 But when it comes to,10228 fur the first thing they10230 say is We've got synthetics,10233 synthetics are causing microfibers and10234 all kinds of problems with the rest10236 of10237 the environment.
This10238 process that we do in the fur industry has gone on for 10,000 years since10243 the beginning of mankind. We have never exhausted our resources where they're well managed. It goes10249 on and on the processes10250 clean and it is10251 vastly superior to all the oil wells that10252 are out there that they want to close down10254 And with that I just want10255 to end with one quick quote only. Take 1 second. Uh, it's a post World War two by Pastor martin numerous is first they came10263 for the socialists and I did10264 not speak out because I was not a socialist. Then they came for the10268 trade unionists and I did10269 not speak out because I10271 was not a trade unionist.10272 Then they came for the Jews and I did not speak10274 out because I10275 was not a Jew. Then they came for me and there was nobody left
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
and I'm sorry to interrupt.10282 We're finished. That was10283 it. Thank you very much appreciate your testimony. Are there any comments or questions from committee members seeing none, Kevin Zeller, please,10297 wow,10298 Can you hear me? We can welcome mr Zeller
[KEVIN ZELLER (MAX ZELLER FURS):][HB965][SB623] Thank you10302 to the Massachusetts legislators. My name is Kevin Zeller. I am the president of Max Zeller Furs in West Springfield Massachusetts.10309 I am testifying in opposition of bills HB 965 and10315 SB 623 of the act of prohibiting the sale of fur our company will Be celebrating10321 in 20 22. Our10323 100th anniversary of being in the for business in Massachusetts10327 Max Zeller Furs was established10329 in 1922 by my grandfather. We are now into a 4th10334 generation at Max Zeller Furs. Our company has survived world wars, depressions, recessions and10341 pandemics. It's10342 very hard to fathom that our demise will come10344 because of the stroke of a10347 pen10347 from10348 legislators. I ask the legislators to let the free market10351 principles determine the fate of the fur industry. Please don't use legislation10355 to make a law to satisfy a minority of animal rights people who don't like fur. I ask all of the legislators10363 to go on the website of PETA and the Humane Society of the10367 United States and you will see for yourself10371 there against all animal usage. They are10373 against using animals for food, clothing, aquariums, zoos, hunting, fishing, medical research10381 and now specific pet ownership.
If you pass these bills, HB10387 965 and SB 623, the animal rights people will not stop because this is not a for issue. This is an10394 animal usage issue. To10395 prove my point, I10397 beg the Massachusetts legislators to go on to PETA and the Humane Society of10401 the United10402 States websites to see for themselves that they10406 are against all animal usage. The passing of these bills10409 will cause economic harm10410 to many10411 companies in the state of Massachusetts. Many of the fur retailers10415 in Massachusetts are small family owned businesses. It's hard to fathom that legislators would close down businesses because of minority of people who don't like fur the animal rights organizations are spreading misinformation about the, fur industry to further their cause10431 and misinform the public that the fur industry is evil and that is10435 simply not the case.10436 Animal activists will have you believe that mink are tortured and that can be10440 further from the truth. The10442 fur industry supports humane treatment of animals in closing Forefathers stepped across Plymouth Rock to10450 find freedom. My grandfather came to this country in search10453 for freedom. His legacy is close to 10010456 years old.
10457 I asked the10458 Massachusetts legislators to not limit10459 my freedom and let10461 the people of the Commonwealth choose whether they want to purchase for isn't that they're right for freedom is to10467 choose. Thank you and I will be10472 sending in written10473 testimony.
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you Mr Zeller. We appreciate your10475 testimony and we will look forward to receiving your, your written remarks. Are there10482 any10482 questions or10483 comments from committee members seeing none. I welcome Richard merchant. Mhm Hello, I'm actually Don LaFountain and Richard as a family emergency. Okay, well, welcome Mr LaFountain. The floor is yours.
[DON LAFOUNTAIN (MASSACHUSETTS TRAPPERS ASSOCIATION):][HB965][SB623] Uh Richard we're board members of the10505 Massachusetts Trappers Association. We have sent in a written statement for this. We're opposed to Senate Bill 623 and H10516 965. We're going to address the raw fur band sale from portion of this from Massachusetts.10523 The uh, for 199610525 the Wildlife protection act passed, It required that trappers in Massachusetts use humane style traps. These were considered humane10532 by the Humane Society of the United States, the MSPCA as well as several other groups. And10537 in doing so,10538 we were limited to what are humane traps. We also are limited to a regulations are very strict regulations on trap,10546 check time.10547 We can't just go out there and check and10549 we have days after days, we have to go every day, check the traps, make sure the animal is taken out of it at that time. We cannot drown an animal in Massachusetts. So methods that10561 we have left to us are10563 to follow the10564 American Veterinary Medical Association guidelines for field10568 euthanasia. Um, okay, we also10571 have a wanton waste law in Massachusetts. We can't just take animals10575 trapped them and then throw them10576 into the woods. This10577 is important because the, fur10579 ban would virtually wipe out trapping en mass that we believe this to10584 be10584 a backdoor approach to do that. Um, people trapped for,10590 they process it themselves. Sometimes they send it to make10593 them oil and a lot of the trappers make their own products and then sell10597 them at craft. fares, they're gonna wipe this out.
Uh, there's,10601 there's for that's10603 harvested from the roads roadkill and it's processed and uh, turned into clothing as well.10611 These animals were killed anything except were run over by a car. And uh,10615 this will also10616 stop that industry. There10617 are several stores that do that. Uh, we're uh concerned with10623 the trap ban. Uh,10625 excuse me.10626 The first sale of raw10628 fur we would like these bills to be go through10632 with a no vote and if not maybe a an amendment recommendation to allow10639 raw fur captured10640 in Massachusetts. Excuse me, I wasn't really10644 prepared for this at the last moment. I'm sorry. And the the waste10650 bill will10651 I am a full time professional wildlife control operator10655 and we do as10656 much of the work we as10657 we can during the10659 in season for trapping. We do a lot of10661 well, uh flow control devices. We work closely with10664 companies that are very well. Hundreds and a couple of thousands of these devices in10670 the state. They don't10671 all work everywhere and non lethal control is10673 not 100%.
The fur ban will require us10677 to trap any10678 time of year, puts a burden on the boards of health who have an10681 unfunded mandate since the 199610683 vote to come up with regulations10685 for emergency permits. Emergency permits would then be required in season because we would then have to, release the10694 animals. We can't just10696 take them and throw them away. We can't sell the for it's a backdoor approach to end trapping in Massachusetts and were totally opposed10705 to this. Thank10706 you10706 for your time. And I'm sorry. I wasn't as prepared10708 as I should have been.
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank10711 you.10711 Mr LaFountain for your testimony. And you're of10713 course, welcome to submit written10715 testimony as a follow up to your comments. Um and I10718 would also encourage you to include some of that permitting detail that10721 you described in that information as well. So10723 we have it in writing. Are there10725 any questions10726 or comments from members of the committee?10730 Seeing10730 none. I will10731 call10731 the next speaker, Melanie calandra.
[MELANIE10737 CALANDRA (INTERNATIONAL FUR FEDERATION):][HB965][SB623] Hello, Hi, Madam. Chairman members of the committee. Thanks for10742 the opportunity to testify against the proposed ban. HB 965 and SB10747 623. My name10748 is Melanie Calandra. I'm10749 a managing director at10750 the International Fur Federation. Many of10752 you have been given a10753 great amount of misinformation and I know that those of you10756 who would support this legislation would be10758 doing so with10759 good intentions, but you're being10761 deceived. This draft legislation is10763 riddled with vicious claims about the fur trade that are simply false. The fur trade in North America10768 is a small scale family run artisanal industry but10772 provides vital income10773 for remote indigenous communities And fur farming has strict10777 animal welfare standards with 3rd Party audits. Their code of practice was prepared by10782 veterinarians, animal welfare researchers,10784 producers and other experts fur farming10787 is sustainable. Everything is10788 used. You might be surprised10790 to know that fur10791 farming takes10792 over 50,000 tons of food waste a year,10794 diverting it from landfill manure is used for10797 fertilizer. Mink oil is used as biodiesel. Everything is used in previous testimony. Animal extremists have tried10803 to claim that for farms threatened public health because mink10806 can be susceptible to COVID10808 19.
In fact with proper biosecurity and quarantine when necessary. Dr Anthony Fauci and the10814 CDC have stated that they do not consider mink farms to be a10818 public health risk. In fact, the Danish agriculture minister had to resign for overstepping on this very file fur farmers deserve your10826 support. Your bill10827 talks about alternatives to fur most of which are petroleum based synthetics. These will cause more harm10833 to nature fur bio degrades at the rate of a willow leaf. In fact, ecosystems depend on the10838 fur trade wild10839 source fur is well regulated at10841 the regional state federal levels with two10843 I.S.O. And international agreements on humane trapping trapping will exist even with the fur ban because we need to protect and monitor endangered species trapping also10852 helps with the reintroduction of species into the original habitats like the American10856 river otter for example, helps with public safety, prevention of property10860 damage and much more United States currently has10863 the best wildlife10864 management model in the world.
As a result,10866 the fact remains, if you ban for it doesn't protect any animals, it makes matters worse for10871 them and their ecosystems. In closing, I strongly ask that you reconsider this ban and I10875 thank you for the opportunity to testify. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
10878 Thank10878 you Miss calandra. Are there any questions or comments from committee members seeing none. I want to thank you all first of all for your patience. I recognize it's been a very10891 long day and I10892 know we still have a number of folks who are10894 waiting to testify. The next person on the list here is joseph Alfonzo followed10899 by four remaining individuals on this particular bill.10904 Manuel Hotsy,10905 a new Vassilios Mariano Christopher burgundy and Michael Zeller in that10911 order. So if10912 joseph Alfonzo is with us, he is10915 welcome to the floor >10916 not seeing mr Alfonzo. Manuel Haggerty a new
[MANUEL HATZIIOANNOU(GLAMA FURS INC):][HB965][SB623] Hello everybody, I'll make this short because a lot of people have10933 already kind of answered a lot of questions. Um,10937 uh, my family is10938 actually one10939 of the local retailers here in10942 Massachusetts. Um, we own a, fur10944 retail store in Peabody called10947 Glama Furs. Um, I'm just gonna give you a little back story of my family and how they just trade, um,10953 you know, gave us everything that you10955 know, we kind of needed growing up and and how my father started it from,10962 from nothing. So My father started um, working in10965 the, fur fur in the, for factory at 14 years old and he was10970 required to do this because his father was murdered and his mother needed help paying rent, things to that sort and He worked 24 years10980 saving up, you know, just to just to10982 put money aside in order so that10983 he can open up his10984 own business,10985 his own family business and so that he10989 could, you know, give our family a better opportunity that he never, he never got when he was10997 younger And after 24 years we were except he was accepted him, my11000 mother11000 were accepted to the United States where they settled here in Peabody and It took them 31 years um to get here to where we11012 are now and it's only11014 a family business and everyone,11015 you know, when we grew11016 up there, we grew up learning how to walk11018 in the store11019 because we couldn't11020 afford, you know, nannies and stuff like11021 that when we first came here and uh I just11024 wanted to say his story11026 because he, you11027 know,11027 I'm very proud of my father.
I'm very proud of our family business and uh it's hard for me to talk about it because I have to speak for11037 my11037 father because he has a11040 hard11040 time translating things that he wants to say. Um he was diagnosed with11044 stage four brain cancer and the last three years he's been going to work every single day, you know, fighting for his business, fighting for,11052 you11052 know, to take care of my11053 mother to take care of his family11055 because we don't have enough money to11057 just say, hey, we need,11058 we can retire right now and walk away.11061 Um so every day11063 going through chemotherapy radiation, he goes to work is everything he has to do has been a model citizen. He's done everything that11071 America has ever wanted from him and you know,11075 mhm
You know they talk about the community awareness and I think I think of the awareness of immigrants here in11084 America, you know who11086 sacrificed everything to11087 open a business and you know, I11089 don't think it's fair to people like him who have worked day in11093 day11094 out their entire lives11095 to be11096 told, You11097 know in their early 60s that they now have to go collect unemployment because11101 they're no longer there are no longer allowed11103 to sell things that they've done their entire lives. You know the people11107 come into my my family11108 store and they love my father, they11110 love us, they11111 you know they work directly with us.11113 You know we11114 we we've been serving the11116 area of Essex County and Greater Boston for11120 31 years. And um you can ask any single one of our clients, you11123 know what they think of us, what they think of our family and you know, I just want to make something, telling a family story and I appreciate all your time and thank you.
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank11136 you Mr Hudson,11137 I appreciate you um sharing that family story. It's11142 it's um clearly an important, important thing to here today. Any comments or questions from11149 the committee, seeing none I would11150 welcome what I assume is a family member11155 of yours, Vasilios Tatiana, That's right because11157 his brother and I'm very proud of him to11160 tell11160 that story.
[VASILIOS HATZIIOANNOU (GLAMA FURS INC):][HB965][SB623]11162 Um, thank you for providing me the opportunity to give my statement against the two bills, both S 62311171 and H 965. My name is Vasilios and my family owns Glama Furs in Peabody. My statement is going to be focused on really two parts, which is one being the problem statements related to your proposed solutions in your bill and two, how11186 it influences actually11188 digital retail sales that works against11189 you're said solution in your bill. So in regards11192 to the issue with retail sales of fur being that that it promotes and it comes from inhumane slaughtering animals, I would think that most people in this column, most businesses would11202 agree that it's not right to treat animals11204 inhumanely. And I don't think any farmers on this call would even suggest that they11209 do that um from how11210 they're raised to how they're11212 ended, we would all agree that that's11215 not right. But the11216 solution of banning the11217 sale of furs, I've already processed furs into our product11220 doesn't11220 actually solve the problem that you're trying11222 to address. But the bill11223 ought to be focused on is to push11226 for the ban the banning11229 of actually purchasing first from11230 farmers who have you inhumane practices and that11233 doesn't really relate to anyone here.
Um, also should11236 really be focused11237 on farmers not11238 being able to inhumanely treat their animals instead of punishing the retails that they buy from. Um11244 this change would actually tackle the problem you're trying to prevent11247 and solve in your bill. Not only11249 does it really invoke11250 change in how11252 farmers treat their animals,11253 but it also keeps small businesses11255 operational as well as giving those farmers the retail business that they need11261 to um to11262 stay in business. Um, it also, instead11264 of closing small businesses11265 that ultimately affect farmers, closing11267 for the lack of purchases from these retailers, what you're actually would be doing, spreading awareness and promoting humane treatment of animals. So I believe11276 fur retailers and farmers11277 here would all get11278 behind a bill of11280 something like that because no one here does anything11282 inhumanely Um in addition, not all animals like minks our11284 farm for their for it11286 seems to be like11288 a popular blanket statement that11290 fur farms only use their animals for11292 fur.
Minks11293 are commonly farmed for11295 their meat, fishing, agriculture11296 for crabs and lobsters and11297 etcetera, it's been made clear that most of your testimony is aside from Lisa earlier11302 has been focused on farmers11303 and not retailers that11304 do things inhumanely just11305 like the call that out your connections to the problem11309 solutions are slightly flawed11310 there. My second point is by shutting down sales11312 of fur products11313 are opening the door for retailers to make changes11315 to sell online, which in turn would actually11317 hurt you bill because now retailers11319 have the opportunity to sell to a wider11321 audience11321 to people all over11323 the country while not having to claim the11325 business in Massachusetts. Me myself being an expert in e11328 commerce for over eight11329 years selling products and11330 buying products online is now11332 the majority and preferred method of selling and purchasing11334 items. This bill would create a negative cause and effect where you're actually trying to accomplish really concluded banning the persons11342 of furs from inhumane11343 farming. It is not only more impactful of a bill but11347 it creates a greater change. It promotes better education humane treatment11351 of animals and keeps businesses like my father's open and operational to help the country state thrive today's state. That's it.11361 Thank you for your time.
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank11365 you11365 appreciate your testimony. Are there any comments11370 or questions from committee members? None. Um Christopher burgundy if he is with us, I am here welcome
[CHRISTOPHER BORGATTI (BHA):][HB965][SB623][HB88] Thank you Representative Dykema senator Rausch and members of the joint11379 committee my11380 name is Christopher Borgatti. I live11382 in Newbury Massachusetts and I'm11383 the New England and New York11385 chapter coordinator for Backcountry Hunters11387 and Anglers. Also known as11389 B.H.A. Um here to11390 talk about H 965 S 623 but also H 8811396 which I'll start with11398 B.H.A. is a North American conservation organization. That is the sportsman's voice11402 for public lands, waters and wildlife11406 In a word. H 88 is undermining it undermines the North American model of11412 wildlife conservation,11414 An important tenet of which is science based wildlife management. The bill undermines the expertise of trained scientific11421 professionals and proposes management practices that are expensive ineffective,11425 pose public health risks and are inhumane. The bill undermines the purpose and implementation of laws validly11433 enacted by the state on behalf of all state citizens by seeking to override them with municipal11439 regulation. However, legal president president demonstrates that the state holds supremacy over local regulatory bodies,11447 not the other way around the bill further undermines the funding mechanisms that are used11452 to manage wildlife and public lands in the state of Massachusetts.
A significant portion11457 of these lands and11458 their management are paid for by11460 hunting and fishing license fees and federal funding directly tied to11464 hunters and anglers. This bill undermines this11467 funding by jeopardizing the opportunities for hunters to access11471 thousands of acres11472 of public land across dozens of towns and in so doing so compromises hunter recruitment and retention. The impacts to wildlife management funding should be obvious. H 88 is11484 undermining. It's also shortsighted.11487 The bill's author attempts to broadly legislate a perceived problem, not a real one. The consequences are which run far and wide any attempt to pass such a law would11497 most certainly result in litigation as H 88 reaches too far regarding 965 and S 623 uh seems to be directed at banning11507 the sale of fur11508 products due to a range of concerns related to commercial for farming industry.
This topic is11513 outside of my organizations focus11514 area, but I do understand the issues these types of operations. Why some people feel very strongly about it. The reason the Massachusetts membership of B. H. A.11523 Opposes the bill has11524 nothing to do with commercial fur farming but has to do with the unintended effects11527 it could11528 have on hunters and trappers in Massachusetts. Hunting and trapping, including11532 fur bearing animals11533 is an important tool11534 that is utilized by state to manage and balance wildlife populations to11538 achieve11539 ecological goals and minimize conflict11541 between wildlife and people,11543 pets and property. The11544 state11545 manages wildlife carefully through science setting open seasons,11548 methods of take and bag limits. My11550 group recognizes hunting and11552 trapping as valid and traditional pursuits without a well stated and substantial11556 reason to include the sale of fur from these legal, sustainable11559 and highly regulated pursuits. We do not11563 believe the state of fur from11564 hunting and trapping should be included in the ban. And addressing these concerns.11568
Just end11570 with uh11571 that an exemption which is in section through the bill explicitly state furs obtained by hunting and trapping11578 should state and list11580 for is obtained by hunting and trapping as11582 an exemption. Thank you very much for your time.
11585 SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you mr11586 Barghouti. Um and I welcome any written testimony you'd like to submit11590 as well. Are there any questions or comments11592 from committee members. Seeing none11596 is Michael11597 Zeller with us. Hi11600 there. Yes, do you hear me? We can welcome. Hi there.11605 Thank you.
[MICHAEL ZELLER (CONCERNED CITIZEN):][HB965][SB623] Thank you for11609 this opportunity. Uh, to those in11611 the Massachusetts legislature on this11615 subject. Um, I'm opposed of the bill HB 965 and11620 SB 623. Uh, these bills will create a slippery slope for11623 the radical agenda of11624 the animal rights groups to11626 legislate other animal usage industries out of business. If this11630 bill passes, this will not11631 be the end of the11632 animal rights groups to push other industries to extend11636 extinctions. First is just the beginning of the11638 agenda, not11639 the end. PETA has already stated. They will try to end pet11643 usage, dairy farming, dairy farms, fishing and hunting there to agenda11648 is abolishing all animal usage period. Please go11651 to the website to11652 see for yourself their11654 propaganda, get the facts. Do not depend on the animal rights movement.11657 To tell11658 the truth, the agenda of animal rights extremists is to remove all meat production. Abolish milk products such as11665 cheese, ice cream,11666 butter and other milk byproducts abolish natural fibres that11670 come from animals such as wools, down and11673 leather, abolished pet ownership that includes your dogs or11676 cats, abolished fishing and hunting, abolished medicines that11679 derived from animals by products and medical11683 research.
Humane in animal welfare is not the same11686 as the animal rights movement. Please do11688 not make a knee jerk reaction11690 that will affect11691 so many jobs and industries that will be11694 affected now and in the future. Um, I just want11698 to make a11699 statement that if you allow trapping the fact that the matter is trapping needs by needs a uh ability to sell that product. And it and to me it doesn't make sense that if you're going to keep considered trapping as something that's viable11715 in the state which it is, there11717 has to be uh ability to uh use that by product of the trapped animals. So the fur industry is dependent on those11727 people as well.11728 And so you can't have it11729 two ways where you have trapping but you can't11732 have a fur retailer. Uh and I11735 want to just uh sign off11737 and say thank you for allowing me to speak today. Thank you.
11741 SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you Mr Zeller and I appreciate your patience with a long day. I know you've been waiting a11746 long time. Are there any questions or11748 comments11748 from members of the11752 committee seeing none. Thank11753 you very much for your testimony. Um Mr Zeller was the final um speaker who was signed11759 up to speak on behalf of House 9 65 and Senate11764 6 23. So we are now moving on to the three11768 remaining pieces of legislation11769 on which there are11770 folks scheduled to testify. There are for, it looks like six people on my my list11777 who still have not been called and11779 they will be called in11780 the following11781 order Elizabeth Magner Leslie, Lupino. Cheryl blank Kado Naomi Covino Elaine11791 generally. And Gail11792 Hansen11792 who I understand has joined us. So I will first call on11796 House 96611797 Senate 584 and House 1966 and act concerning11801 the use of animals in product testing,11803 Elizabeth11804 Magner.
[ELIZABETH MAGNER (MSPCA):][SB584][HB966] Hi, thank you Chair Dykema11809 and members thank you11810 and11810 members of the committee for11811 hearing my testimony.11813 I'm here from my11814 name is Elizabeth Magner and I'm an animal advocacy11817 specialist at the Massachusetts Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals And I'm11821 here to testify in support of11824 S584 and H966.11827 This legislation would require manufacturers and contract testing facilities to use alternative test methods that reduce refine, replace vertebrate animal testing. When such alternatives exist. These bills apply to products such as cosmetics, household cleaners and industrial chemicals.11844 They do not apply to11845 testing done for medical research, including the testing of drugs or medical devices11850 and I just wanted to note11851 that the committee has reported this legislation favorably in past sessions and the language filed in these bills reflects earlier committee drafts. Animal testing often fails to mimic human pathophysiology and therefore fails to accurately predict human11864 responses.
This is a reality that has been noted by11867 the private sector, leading many companies to stop testing their products on animals and by leaders in the scientific community as well. For example, in September of 2019, the EPA announced that it would reduce mammal study requests and funding by11881 30% By 2025 and in reliance on tests using mammals entirely by 2035 as far back as11889 2008, the director11890 of the NIHs Chemical genomics Center stated traditional animal testing is expensive, time consuming, uses a lot of animals. And from a scientific perspective, the results do not11900 necessarily translate to humans. So for years now the NIH FDA DARPA, another agencies have all been methodically and definitively moving away from animal11910 testing. Animal testing also inflicts intense and prolonged suffering on tens of thousands of animals every year in the11917 US.
They endure11918 harsh chemicals being rubbed into their eyes, forced down their throats uh and sometimes over a prolonged period of time and often without pain relief. In contrast to the use of animals. Non animal technologies11931 such as three D. Printing, artificial human tissue organs on chips. And sophisticated computer programs allow for more accurate and reliable assessment of the safety of chemicals, cosmetics and other consumer products. And11944 there11945 are in fact several non animal test method developers based right11948 here in Massachusetts, including MatTek in Ashland and11951 Supertech in Cambridge. Several other states have11954 now already passed laws that prohibit the sale of cosmetics11957 tested11957 on animals and11958 New York and New Jersey have passed11960 laws requiring companies to11961 use non animal testing methods similar to this legislation.
Massachusetts, which is the second highest state11968 recipient of NIH research dollars and a leader in11971 research and biotechnology should be11972 aligned with this major11974 shift that's happening and moving toward non animal methods. So in short,11978 using alternative testing methods when they are already available,11981 saves time money and benefits both people and animals by reducing animal11986 testing in11987 the Commonwealth will be able to11989 ultimately deliver better results for human health and safety and also11992 reduce unnecessary animal suffering. And11995 so we urged the11997 committee to report these bills favorably and thank you for your time and consideration.
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you12003 for12003 your testimony, Miss Monger. Are there any questions or comments from committee members?12008 Seeing none. I12011 welcome12011 Leslie Lupino.12012 Mhm. Okay. Yeah, those All right. All right.
[LESLIE LUPPINO (BERKSHIRE VOTERS FOR ANIMALS):][HB966][SB584] Uh12026 my12027 name is Leslie Luppino and I represent a group12031 called Berkshire Voters for Animals and also testifying in support of of, you know, with12037 the bill, we're talking about with the use of concerning animals in product testing. I'd12042 like to say12044 just briefly, obviously, uhh say what she said. So we work closely.12047 So just a little about our group were an advocacy group that helps to protect12053 animals through the advocacy and getting people to as I'm12058 doing to speak out. Uh you know, it's really about12061 with while I'm listening12062 today, it's it's just about how12065 it's a different perspective of humane treatment to animals and that animals aren't here for us to, you know, as as a to use as a, as12075 a commodity and I12076 think that's that's the big thing. So in this particular bill uh as Liz said, it's uh they're more effective means for12085 doing this and then we don't need to test on animals. And so I just in the interests of time, just second12094 what Elizabeth said and hope that the committee will um pass this favorably this bill out of committee.
And12101 also I just wanted to add that, you12103 know the bills that we have talked about that.12106 Our group is also in support12108 of the fur ban12109 and also of12110 the pet shop ban and12112 we passed some local ordinances it12114 about that12116 as well. So thank you.
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you mrs latino. And we appreciate hearing from western Massachusetts. Are there12124 any comments or questions from committee members? Mhm Seeing12128 none. We will move on to testimony on Senate 550 an act relative to heart warm in dogs. First to testify as Cheryl12139 blank Kado. Thank you. Can you12142 hear me? We can welcome
12144 [SHERYL BLANCATO (CONCERNED CITIZEN):][SB550][SB551] Thank you madam. Chair. My name is Sheryl Blancato. I'm12149 a certified animal welfare administrator. I am also had 25 years experience in animal welfare. I'm12156 a retired animal control officer and12158 also for12159 20 years.12160 I was an animal12162 inspected for animal inspector appointed by Massachusetts, Department of Agriculture. I am in strong12168 support of House of Senate Bill 550 and12170 551. Um I will be12172 brief since I12174 do want to put12175 in written testimony on 550. It's important to12178 know that Howard is common in Massachusetts. It is not transmitted dog to dog, it has to have12183 a vector which is a mosquito which we all12187 know12188 are very12189 prevalent in Massachusetts. Um There is12192 no requirement that owners keep dogs on preventative or treat them12196 even though12197 that's what they should do. Therefore the importation12200 of dogs to be treated for heartworms poses no risk to the Commonwealth12205 and the animals that are12207 in it. Um as you've heard many testimonies before me about the problems with vendors. Onerous regulations preventing12216 these animals from coming in as12218 causing their death in12219 shelters in the south we're unable to bring them in um and therefore we were unable to adopt them out.
And that has caused a lot of issues here in Massachusetts because12232 there are not enough animals12233 for the demand for12235 adoption. So I would like to ask12238 that Senate Bill 550 be12240 passed favorably Um on Senate Bill 551. Um I12242 do want to note there was a couple of notes of opposition from some breeders who felt that they were left off of the oversight committee. Um the reason why they are not there um and I would certainly welcome an amendment to allow them to be on their if12260 MDAR was overseeing breeders. However, I've been told repeatedly by MDAR that they do not oversee breeding operations because12267 those are overseen12269 by the U.S.D.A. And locally local ordinances oversee kennel operations.12274 So therefore um I just want to make a comment on those oppositions that they are welcome to the table if MDAR changes and12283 does oversee them um oversight. I think it's critically12286 important because as you've heard, there is a lot of onerous regulations on12290 shelters and rescues in particular12292 that have caused a12294 lot of12295 financial hardships12296 and the prevention of12298 adoptions of um animals in Massachusetts.
This12301 is not an uncommon thing Colorado, for example is one that has an oversight committee. Um and I will go into depth in12309 that in the written testimony. Um12310 I also want to note that I think the oversight is Important because we need12317 valuable information from several people in making12320 these regulations. The latest regulations were put through at the12324 height of COVID in 2020 and they had devastating effects. Uh The hearings that I attended on these regulations were strongly opposed by many people in the public. Many experts in the field12338 research data was provided of the concerns that many12342 of these regulations went against national best practices and yet12345 they were still put in um in my opinion, MDAR12349 has more authority to put in regulations and12352 the legislative, they can put these in without12355 whether there's12356 opposition or not.
There's no oversight and shelters12359 and rescues have no recourse other than the court system for these regulations. So I would ask for a favorable Support of12368 Senate Bill 551 to get12371 a oversight committee to help regulate um MDAR and provide strong oversight for this. Thank you.
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you. Mr Okada. And we look forward to receiving your written testimony. Any questions or comments from committee members. Okay, seeing none.12385 Naomi Covino, please.
12388 [NAOMI12390 COVINO (BROWN DOG COALITION):][SB550][SB551] Good evening.12392 Chair Dykema Chair, Rausch And the members of the committee. I'm Naomi, Covino,12395 and I live in Hopkinton. I am the founder of Brown Dog Coalition, which is a foster based rescue12402 in Hopkinton. I've been doing12403 this for over five12404 years now in about12405 10 years total and rescue and last year we rescued over 500 cats and dogs. I primarily bring up dogs from the south. And so I have first hand knowledge of both of these bills that are12418 before us. So12419 I'm in support of the act for the um relative to heartworm In dogs. The current regulations for importing dogs into the12429 state do not allow heartworm positive12431 dog to come into Massachusetts12434 Heartworm. For those who don't know,12435 it's a deadly disease that's really quite widespread in the south, but it's not very common up here, not nearly as common as down south. It's literally worms around the heart. It looks like spaghetti around the heart.12448 Those are the adult worms.12450 Baby worms are found in the bloodstream.12452 And as Sheryl said, you need a mosquito to12455 bite an infected dog and then bite another dog in order to transmit the disease. And so12461 it's a vector borne12464 illness.
So12465 it's pretty difficult to spread it. 30 days of12469 antibiotics can kill those baby worms12471 and basically make the dog not be um12475 an infectious agent. Um The American Heart Association has put out regulation or put out guidelines,12483 joint recommendations that Say12484 that you can12485 bring up dogs in12486 order to help with the overpopulation12488 problem and the Euthanasia that's happening in the south after these 30 days of12494 doxycycline. However, the new regulations that the Department of Agriculture has put out go in direct opposition to this. And so we're asking you to um the impact12504 is is that the dogs have to literally stay and get treatment for 4-6 months and generally they're in foster homes,12512 they're tying up a foster which12514 is keeping dogs from being able to move from the shelter to12517 a foster and they're being euthanized in the12519 shelter12519 because of that. Um I brought up multiple heartworm positive dogs after12523 they were treated. And it's a real12526 um it's a it's a real hardship on the organization. The other hardship on the the organization is12532 the department of regulations new rules that as Sheryl said they rolled out in the middle of COVID. Um very quietly not everyone got the regulations and there's no real explanation on how to, there was no um question answer.
There was12548 no opportunity for12550 more information. Um the Department of Agriculture are currently12554 acting as they make the laws, they12556 rule on12557 whether you're following the laws and then12559 they penalize you.12560 So they're all um member, they're all aspects of the the branches of government. Um and12567 because of that they're all powerful and rescues and shelters are12571 scared of them.12573 Um They that a lot of the regulations are against the best practices that are put forward by general um like veterinary bodies. And so we're looking for12584 an oversight committee to12586 help um shelters and rescues primarily12589 have some recourse um and12591 be able to um12593 have an appeal12595 process their fined. Um And literally there asking Quarantine facilities to put doors in front of doors so that you have like an12604 airlock before you walk into12606 a quarantine area and it's tens of thousands of dollars to do that. So I urge you to vote in12611 favor of bills 550 and 551 and thank you for the opportunity to speak.
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you mr Giannino12618 for your testimony. It's always12619 great to see a constituent and I would12622 encourage you to submit your testimony in writing and we will certainly make sure12626 the committee members get a copy of12628 that. Are there any questions or comments from committee members Seeing none? We will12635 move on to the final bill12637 on the docket this evening with someone12640 signed up to testify12641 in that Senate 585 an act to prevent animal suffering by12646 irresponsible breeding practices and we have one person signed12650 up12651 to testify. Alain Jean Elie, Hello, can12655 you hear me?12656 We can welcome Jehlen
12660 [ELAINE GIANELLI (CONCERNED CITIZEN):][SB585] Um,12661 I thank you for allowing me to testify. Prize. My name is Elaine Gianelli12666 I'm a lifelong resident of Foxborough and I'm a very ethical and responsible dog breeder. I'm12672 testifying today to ask you to oppose the12676 amendment to SB 585 and12677 I'll try to explain to you today how this bill will personally affect me. If this bill12683 passes, this bill12684 will pretty much eliminate many ethical, responsible breeders who live in a residential neighborhood, who are not allowed to obtain a kennel license.12693 The house I live and used to be12695 zoned agricultural when I was younger,12697 I had a horse and my neighbor had cows, sheep, chickens, I'm now12702 zoned residential, so I am not allowed to have farm animals. But12707 more importantly, I am12708 not allowed to have12711 a kennel12712 license because SB 58512714 changes to the12716 definition of kennel12717 to anyone that12718 has at least one or more dogs bred on a residential property and they require them to have a kennel12726 license. I would never be able to12728 have another litter because I cannot get account license in my town. I12733 imported a quality female Lancashire heeler from England.12736 She has been12737 fully health tested and has a DNA health12740 profile.
I brought her to12742 the USA specifically to bring new12744 lines to this country to help the breed over here. I am an AKC breeder of merit. I'm a member of both. Beauceron and Lancashire heeler parent clubs, both in the United States and in Europe and I abide by their code of ethics. I do not breed often. Each of my litters are thoroughly researched. I and do not happen unless12765 both parents are fully12766 health tested. I only breed dogs that have a12769 correct temperament and are structurally sound and as many of my pups go on to compete in different dog sports. All my pups are registered with the A.K.C microchip before they12780 leave my house, I thoroughly vet my potential12783 puppy bars to make sure my pups don't12785 end up in a bad situation. I only12788 place my pups in Homes where they12790 will thrive.
My pups will never end up in a shelter because my contract requires12797 the pups come back to me if the owner cannot12800 keep the dog the pup for any reason12803 for the life of the12805 pop. There are many more things that I do for every letter as an ethical and responsible breeder. Uh,12811 this is just a small summary of what I do. If this bill passes, I will not be allowed to breed ever again unless I12819 move out of my current home. I have lived in the same house12823 in Foxborough12824 for 65 years. The12826 house was built by12828 my parents, but I will be forced to either move or12831 to never breed12833 again because my12834 life evolves around my dogs, I will probably decide to move12838 and it will be out of Massachusetts. This12841 bill will hurt12842 or eliminate many responsible ethical breeders12845 and hurt the future of a12846 lot of the breeds in this country. If12848 you do pass this12849 bill, you should ensure12850 that there is an exemption in place to allow people like12854 myself to obtain a kennel license even though the town prohibits it. Please oppose this12860 amendment to SB 585.12862 Thank you very much for your time. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you very much12866 for your for12867 your testimony and for12868 your willingness to wait to the end here and through your patients12872 appreciate it. Are there12874 any comments or questions12875 from members of the committee? Um seeing none. I would12881 like to welcome Gail Hansen who has12884 joined us in jail. I hope you are feeling ok this evening and we appreciate again your waiting till12890 the very end here and12891 the floor is yours.
[GAIL12893 HANSEN (HSVMA):][SB623][HB965] Thank you and good evening to the chairs and12895 members of the joint committee. Thank you for hanging in there. I'm Dr.12899 Gail Hansen. I'm speaking as a veterinarian with the Humane Society of12903 Veterinary Medical12904 Association with our 9000 members nationwide. I have over 25 years experience in infectious12911 disease epidemiology, Including 13 years as a state epidemiologist and the State Public Health Veterinarian for the Kansas Department12916 of Health and Environment. Also 12 years in private veterinary practice, Five years as a very12921 senior officer of the future it will trust and I'm speaking12924 in support of S 623 H 965 for12929 public health reasons. Since the pandemic has begun, I've been closely following the link between animals and spread of SARS-CoV-2 the virus that causes12936 COVID-19. We now know that SARS-CoV-2 has a particularly devastating impact on fur farmed mink and given the high density12944 of animals and the stressful conditions they endure on the12947 farms, the virus can spread and mutate rapidly among the mink genetic analysis from the12952 farm in the Netherlands and Denmark has shown that12955 sick workers gave SARS to12957 the mink The virus spread and mutated in the mink and that that new variant was passed back to people.
And there are also possible cases in Michigan of giving COVID-19 back to people as well make not12970 only complicate the12971 overall control12972 of12972 COVID-19 to people. The SARS-CoV-2 virus circulates12974 in the farms, infecting other mink and infected making also spread the virus to other species, including farm dogs, cats12981 and even more disconcertingly the12983 virus was12984 detected in wild mink near infected farms in Utah and Oregon. This creates the potential for a reservoir for the disease12991 creating a long term risk of the virus recirculating and mutate, not only in mink and people. So as we eventually control COVID-19 in people.12999 Animal reservoirs will become13001 important as relative risk from them13003 will increase if reservoirs are created to infection of different13006 wild and13007 domestic animal populations.
Um the outbreaks in fur farmers around the world represents serious13012 public health risk. It's my expert opinion that this demonstrates the need and the fur13017 trade to protect the public and public health. I13019 think states like Massachusetts can be leaders in expanding fur sale sales and I hope you support bills 623 and 8 965. Thank13027 you for your time. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you Dr Hansen and I hope13033 you will provide written testimony with a summary of your research and what you've presented dr Hansen.13040 Um are there any questions or13043 comments from member of members of the committee. Seeing none. Thank you again,13048 Dr Hansen. And according to my list here, Dr Hansen is the13052 final individuals signed up to testify. Is there anyone13056 who is with us who would like to still be13059 heard on any of the13060 bills13060 that we've discussed today.13061 Okay. Okay. Um seeing none,13066 I will summarise, there's13068 some additional bills also included in this hearing which did13072 not have any oral testimony.13074 House 4213, House 987 Senate 581 and Senate 583 which are all13081 also included in this docket. Um and with no additional items on the agenda13088 except to13090 thank our committee members who have remained with us13094 today to hear13095 this testimony. We know it's incredibly important, um, that we13099 do hear from the public and we appreciate their willingness to be13102 here for the13103 afternoon as well. So with no other issues before13106 the13107 committee, is there a motion to adjourn the13110 hearing? Motion to adjourn13111 Madam Chair? Thank you. Representative Gentile was your second. Thank you. Vice Chair Domb appreciate13119 the second this hearing13121 is now closed. Thanks to all for your13124 participation. Thank you. Have a great evening. Thank you.
© InstaTrac 2025