NAVS Legislative Alert

September 24, 2009

- The National Anti-Vivisection Society

jillyz

Thursday, September 24, 2009 4:55 PM

Take ActionThursday! NAVS Legislative Alert

Take Action Thursday! NAVS Legislative AlertWeek of 9/21/09

Advancing ScienceWithout Harming Animals

This week’s “Take Action Thursday” focuses on wolf hybrids, New York animal shelters and a lawsuit against a primate lab.

Find Your Legislators

State Legislation

A bill introduced earlier this year in Washington, SB 5383, would ban the ownership of wolf-hybrid dogs, categorizing them as “potentially dangerous wild animals.” One significant problem with this bill is a lack of legal definition or description for a wolf-hybrid, along with an inability to differentiate wolf-hybrids from other large mixed breed dogs without a genetic test. This has raised the same questions that are troublesome in breed specific bans introduced elsewhere in the country, mostly in relation to “pit bulls.” As with proposed bans on pit bulls, the hazy definition of what constitutes the wolf breed—or hybrid—makes this legislation difficult to enforce. Most animals that fall under this category are several generations away from an actual wolf and the owners may not even realize that there is wolf in their genetic makeup. Wolf-hybrids, like any other mixed breed dog, deserve to be judged “on their deeds, not their breed.” There are already comprehensive laws in place in the state of Washington dealing with threats from dangerous dogs, so there is no need to target these hybrids. The bill has already passed the Senate and is now being considered by the House.If you live in Washington state, please call your state Representative and ask him/her to OPPOSE this bill.

Legal Roundup

On September 9, 2009, a New York Supreme Court ruled that New York City failed to meet its obligations under the Animal Shelters and Sterilization Act of 2000 to operate an animal shelter in each borough on a full-time basis. The City currently operates full-time (24-hour) shelters in only three of its five boroughs. It also operates two part-time shelters with shorter hours in its two remaining boroughs which routinely transfer their animals to one of the other three shelters. The court found that these part-time shelters did not comply with the Act’s mandate. The court gave the city’s Department of Health and Mental Hygiene 60 days to submit a plan for immediate compliance with this order. The suit was filed by a non-profit animal rescue organization, Stray from the Heart, Inc., in order to compel the City of New York to comply with its statutory duty to provide full service animal shelters in all five boroughs.

An interesting lawsuit has been filed in federal district court in Massachusetts. InVivo Therapeutics Corporation (“InVivo”) brought suit against the Oregon Health & Science University (“OHSU”) for breach of contract, breach of good faith, fraud, fraudulent inducement, misrepresentation, unjust enrichment, and unfair business practices that arose out of a contract for OHSU to perform spinal cord research on monkeys at its Oregon National Primate Research Center. In the contract, OHSU guaranteed its ability and willingness to complete the studies. The contract provided for: (1) the number of monkeys available for the study; (2) the claim that OHSU followed Good Laboratory Practices; (3) the level and quality of pre and post operative care provided by OHSU; (4) and OHSU’s willingness and ability to timely complete the studies in accordance with the terms of the parties’ agreements. However the experiment was aborted after the death of four of the seven monkeys who were subjected to the procedure. InVivo claims that these deaths were due to OHSU’s failure to provide the care needed for these monkeys, resulting in the death of the animals and costing the company hundreds of thousands of dollars in research expenses. Previous contentions from animal advocates that OHSU was not providing adequate care to its primates resulted in a warning letter from the U.S. Department of Agriculture for failure to provide necessary veterinary care. Maybe a civil suit will force OHSU to drastically improve its care for animals in its laboratories, which federal regulatory oversight has failed to do.

For a weekly update on legal news stories, go to Animallaw.com.

Feedback

G