Bringing Up from the Comments
February 15, 2012
Reader Daniela spoke with an aide in NYS assemblywoman Amy Paulin’s office this morning regarding the Quick Kill bill. Here is Daniela’s summary of the conversation. Interesting to note that Amy Paulin’s aide has never heard of Best Friends:
The bill has been passed in the committee and is moving on to the next stage. The assistant I talked to was very nice – when I asked what the status was she asked if I wanted to talk about it. I told her I was opposed to it and she said she has only been hearing from people opposed to the bill. There have also been death threats so she has the door locked – I can’t blame her on this one. In talking to the assistant I do not think they understand the mentality of the kill shelter. They are in an area where their shelter is no kill and does everything it can to reunite owners and their lost pets and try to get them homes. They have the “if practicable” language in there because it seems like they think that it is unrealistic to give a time frame – like 4 hours within intake. Personally I would be happy with “must scan for microchip before bringing to the kill room” as long as it guarantees the animal will be scanned at least once in its stay.
They also claim the ability to kill in 60 seconds is not in the bill. I am not a lawyer and have not read the full bill so I do not know if that provision is in there specifically or not but since so many people are pointing it out some language in there must something there that leads people to believe that an animal could be killed immediately. She is also claiming that shelters will not kill animals just for whining or being scared – I think she is naive on what kill shelters actually do.
It seems like Amy Paulin really does want to do what is best for the animals but she is not aware of the actual implications of this bill. I asked why she doesn’t support CAARA and I was told that they don’t support it because they do not believe it will be passed because the shelters do not have the ability to do what is in the bill. They did acknowledge that the CAARA bill is the better bill but they feel that they have to go with “makes better” because CAARA will never get out of committee.
I asked about the word “practicable” and was told every piece of legislation has that in there and it’s just there so that shelters without the means to do so are okay. Again I think she is very naive in the mentality of kill shelters and what they can do and what they want to do and what they will do. I did talk to her about the horrors in NYACC – seems like many people are complaining specifically about NYACC.
She did say that most likely they will be making amendments to the bill and they are considering taking out the psychological pain parts. I asked if she would consider working with Best Friends and Alley Cat Allies to help reword and she had never heard of Best Friends – apparently the assistant who helped with this bill moved on so this assistant is not 100% up to speed on who helped where. She did take down their names and what they do so hopefully that means they are willing to accept more discussion about this bill. She did say that she worked with rescues and shelters to get this bill where it was but I refrained from asking her who she worked with besides the ASPCA – mainly cause I didn’t think I could keep a civil tongue in my mouth and I also didn’t think she could tell me that.
Small recap – Amy does believe she is doing the best for the animals – she really thinks it will improve the lives of the animals in shelters in NY. She thinks this is a stepping stone to better legisation as she does not thing CAARA can be passed at this time. This is supposed to help create a bridge to when CAARA can be passed. I doubt she has ever worked with a rescue and seen the conditions of a kill shelter so is naive on what the mentality of the people there is. She thinking that animals cannot be killed within 60 seconds for being in psychological distress – she seems to think the holding period would stop that. She also sounds like she might be willing to work with other organizations to help fix this bill
I have gathered all my knowledge of this bill from all the websites that discuss what this bill means. If some of the people that read and understand the full bill want to contact her they might have a more meaningful conversation with her. I ended the call with us agreeing to disagree on the effects of the bill.
I spent about 20 – 30 min talking to her so if you want any specifics let me know.