Cruelty laws split rights groups, owners
By GRETEL C. KOVACH / The Dallas Morning News
AUSTIN, Texas - When it comes to animal cruelty laws, Texans on both sides of the fence hope their howl is the loudest.
Animal rights advocates say the state is among the least progressive in the nation. But owners whose animals have been seized are furious about what they call overly aggressive tactics and a lack of due process.
Major figures mobilizing on both sides of the statewide debate hail from North Texas. Republican state Rep. Toby Goodman, an Arlington lawyer, authored the 2003 bill that made owners liable for shelter costs and denied them the right to appeal court-ordered shelter placements or destruction of their animals.
Longtime animal cruelty investigator Dave Garcia, vice president for operations at the Dallas-based SPCA of Texas, testified on its behalf. So did another Dallas resident, Skip Trimble, a real estate investor and vice president of the Texas Humane Legislative Network.
"Our current animal cruelty laws are Swiss cheese," Mr. Goodman said. "If you starve an animal to death, you can be prosecuted. But if you don't give the animal water and it dies, you cannot."
It is not a crime under Texas law to kill your own puppy by intentionally running over it with a power mower, skin a feral cat alive or shoot your neighbor's horse.
"Texas is in the 19th century. We haven't even made it to the 20th century," Mr. Trimble said.
Local animal advocates said they had enough votes to close such loopholes this year, but the bill died in committee. They'll try again in the next regular legislative session, in 2007.
On the other side, local animal owners are rallying to get their right of appeal restored.
After a series of highly publicized raids last year on owners suspected of animal abuse, some in Van Zandt and Kaufman counties hired lawyers, filed lawsuits and spoke on national television, saying they were treated unfairly.
The SPCA of Texas, an independent nonprofit that runs shelters in Dallas, McKinney and The Colony, has been lauded for helping county officials shutter puppy mills. But in two recent cases, veterinarians testified against SPCA investigators and said the animals didn't need to be confiscated.
John Sickle, a lawyer from Canton who defended the suspects in those unsuccessful cases, said the lack of an appeals process is absurd.
"People love animals and think the SPCA does a great job, but there's a matter of justice here and a matter of due process," he said.
Lynn Miller, his legal assistant, added: "I don't believe in mistreating animals. But there's so many of these cases where that is not happening. They make a big deal about finding a little poop in the kennel."
Decisions final
Animal owners can appeal court-ordered auctions of their animals. But barring appeals for shelter placements and euthanasia is extremely rare, said Southern Methodist University law professor George Martinez.
"It's probably unconstitutional," said Mr. Martinez, who teaches appellate law. "Normally there is the right to appeal in any case."
In this year's legislative session, Rep. Chente Quintanilla, D-Tornillo, introduced a bill that would have restored owners' right to appeal animal seizures, but it failed.
Mr. Goodman thinks justice is being served.
"These are cruelly treated animals who have been seized by animal control authorities," he said. "There's a trial, there's a determination that the animal has been neglected."
Accused owners have "had their day in court," he said.
A legal case involving confined animals, some so sick they need to be put down, must not be held in limbo until appeals are exhausted, animal advocates said. What's more, they say, shelters can't afford to care for animals while frivolous appeals continue for years.
"What do you do with 300 cats or 18 horses while the owner is appealing? You can see what a burden this placed on local governments," Mr. Trimble said.
The SPCA wins more than 90 percent of its cases, he said, because they are true instances of animal cruelty or neglect. Others say those statistics are proof that justice is skewed because no one wants to be portrayed as in favor of animal cruelty.
A veterinarian who posed as a cameraman when the ABC newsmagazine 20/20 accompanied the SPCA of Texas on what he called an unjustified animal raid said it was easy for shelter staff to convince authorities of cruelty even when it's not warranted.
"Get a picture of an animal behind a chain-link fence with a pathetic expression and a few close-ups on some un-scooped poop ... and you can pull at anyone's heartstrings!" Dr. Gaylon TeSlaa wrote in an e-mail circulating among animal owners' groups.
Dr. TeSlaa said he has donated significant time and money to animal welfare programs in California, where he practices. But he is troubled by the aggressiveness of some private rescue organizations that start to resemble what he called animal "collectors."
Dr. Robert Wright, who runs a mobile veterinary service based in Gilmer, Texas, said many veterinarians are reluctant to oppose SPCA investigators in court because the public views them as infallible.
He was subpoenaed to testify in Lynda Williams' Van Zandt County case because he had administered rabies vaccinations to the animals at her property the day before the July 2004 raid.
He said that conditions were not ideal but that Ms. Williams had hired him to respond to SPCA concerns, and he said he did not believe the animals needed to be seized.
"The SPCA loves to play on sympathies. They make things out to be worse than they are," said Dr. Wright, who has worked as a relief vet for the SPCA's McKinney clinic.
'It's been devastating'
The highly publicized raids also make it hard for owners to find an attorney, Karen Snider said. She blames a cat show rival for filing the complaint that led to the 1994 seizure of about 100 cats from her Arlington home.
In court, "You have this feeling when you walk in that it's a done deal. I lost everything that I held dear, that my whole life revolved around. It's been devastating," Ms. Snider said.
James Bias, president of SPCA of Texas, said his group is not trying to shut down all breeders. Less than 1 percent of its investigations result in court-ordered seizures, he said.
"But we are passionate about our mission – to rescue animals and take them out of abusive situations," he said.
Not all local breeders are convinced.
Carol Beene of Denton said her Great Danes eat better than most humans. She said anybody with a grudge could turn an animal owner in.
"A judge doesn't know anything about dogs – so, in all honesty, doesn't know if it's a good or a bad situation," she said.
The San Antonio-based Responsible Pet Owners Alliance, an advocacy and animal rescue group, is lobbying to get the no-appeal rule overturned.
"Whatever happened to citations and giving animal owners a chance to take care of violations? There must be a better way," said Mary Beth Duerler, the group's executive director.
"We've been the last state to fall. It's been happening all over."
In 2001, Texas became the 38th state to make animal cruelty a felony in some cases. In this year's legislative session, 15 bills were tied to the issue, including one that now makes it an offense to interfere with the duties of an animal control officer.
As animal cruelty complaints increase, groups such as the American Dog Owners Association have posted tips about avoiding seizures, reminding owners that no one can enter their home uninvited without a warrant.
Some owners complain that they lost their homes and businesses after their animals were seized. But there is little sympathy for suspects in animal abuse cases, said Laura May, a Dallas law student interested in a career defending animal rights.
"The animals are the victims here," she said.
NATALIE CAUDILL/Dallas Morning News
Skip Trimble of Texas Humane Legislative Network, with his dogs (from left) Angel, Buddy and Bronte, says Texas animal cruelty laws are in drastic need of an update.
