The life of Wilbur the horse, photographed in a snowy field, could have gone in several directions.
Investigators found Wilbur, a 30-year-old bay with no teeth, turned out in an Addison County pasture that had dead cows in it. He looked undernourished, but at such an advanced age for a horse, it would be hard for anyone to say exactly how he should look.
On Tuesday, animal cruelty investigator Jess Danyow used Wilbur’s photo and his story to illustrate how the state’s animal cruelty statute leaves many situations open to interpretation. The result: investigators don’t have clear guidelines to follow.
For example, the law now calls for animals to be sheltered by a man-made structure or a stand of trees.
“You could stand all day debating whether the trees were enough, were they deciduous, were they evergreen … there’s no winning,” said Danyow, who is executive director of the Addison County Humane Society and head of the state’s Animal Cruelty Investigation Advisory Board.
Instead, she and others called for an investigatory process that takes the animal’s condition into account, and she recommended that the state create training and standards for the people who investigate reports of animal cruelty.
“You need knowledge when you are out there in the field looking at whether an animal is in trouble or not,” said Danyow, who was testifying in the House Agriculture Committee on H.254, a bill that would clarify the state’s animal welfare guidelines. “Not only do we have a broad array of people who can investigate, but there’s little mandate for training.”
The overhaul needed in Vermont is not a one-year process; it’s a multi-year process, Danyow said. “In a perfect world, we’d have a Department of Animal Welfare so it could be handled coherently.”
A multi-year effort
The House Agriculture Committee has heard testimony in past years from animal owners and animal advocates on clarifying Vermont’s animal cruelty legislation. State veterinarian Kristin Haas, Danyow and several others worked on an advisory board that created a 2019 report on the issue for several legislative committees. The report said an informal 2018 survey found about 135 animal-related businesses where animals’ lives could potentially be endangered. They recommended looking at statutes in Maine and Colorado.
Under the existing Vermont statute, investigations and enforcements vary from town to town.
Rep. Rodney Graham, R-Williamstown, described a situation in Williamstown where an animal control officer pursued a resident for personal reasons.
“Williamstown had a completely out-of-control humane officer,” said Graham, who is vice chair of the committee. He said the animals in question had food, water and shelter.
“We’ve had that issue in our town more than once,” said Graham. “I’m not opposed to this bill, and I know it’s probably going to be helpful in some degree, but it ain’t going to solve the whole problem.”
“Our system statewide is very disjointed and variable depending on the town or jurisdiction that has animals within their area,” said Haas. H.254 is a good start, she said, but it doesn’t offer enough information and it doesn’t tie the rules to the well-being of the animals in question. Like Danyow, Haas said inspectors need to have enough expertise to know when an animal is in trouble. Sometimes animals will stand outside in inclement weather when shelter is available, noted Haas.
“Highland cattle come to mind as an animal where, if you put them in a barn, you’ll have a broken barn,” she said. “The barn in many instances is not good for them: they thrive when they are out and about.”
Dianne Lashoones, who owns Water Tower Farm in Marshfield, said inflexible shelter guidelines would unfairly penalize owners who are present at the farm and know when the animals need to be inside.
“If those horses are at the far side of the field and eating grass, they are fine with being out there. If they want to come in, they’re going to stand at the gate and stare at the barn, and we’ll see them and bring them in,” said Lashoones. “I want to make sure the common sense doesn’t get lost, so someone isn’t saying, ‘You don’t have this and this, so you’re not in compliance.’”
Committee Chair Carolyn Partridge, D-Windham, agreed that even people who know about animals don’t always agree on whether the animal is healthy. Partridge is a sheep farmer.
“Obviously with Wilbur, anybody with a set of eyes would know he was not in good condition,” she said.
JoAnn Nichols, the humane investigator for the Humane Society of Chittenden County, said she supports H.254 as it is written. It would be an improvement over existing law, she said.
“I have investigated situations with livestock that had been living in substandard and inhumane conditions, however there was nothing actionable within the current statute that could be done to help these animals or improve their situation,” Nichols said.
‘Elegant solution’ has eluded committee
The panel spent some time discussing the example of Wilbur the horse. Danyow said when the owners reported that they didn’t have the money for Wilbur’s veterinary care, they decided to euthanize him. Then someone stepped forward with the offer of a stall for him at their farm, and Wilbur lived another year.
Danyow said that ideally, any animal cruelty investigator’s first goal is to work with the owners to find ways for them to come in compliance and make the animals comfortable.
It’s not clear if moving Wilbur and keeping him alive for another year was the kinder course of action for him, said Partridge. But his case illustrates the complexity of the issues at hand, she said.
Patridge plans to take more testimony as the committee tries to create language that guides enforcement and assistance without overstepping animal owners’ rights.
“An elegant solution” is what’s needed, Partridge said.
Read the story on VTDigger here: Advocates: Animal cruelty investigators need training, better guidelines.