If evil greenies from elsewhere really were driving South Dakota to make animal cruelty a felony, they'd have a heyday with this headline. In a briefing on Senate Bill 46 with state veterinarian Dustin Oedekoven, State Senator Larry Rhoden (R-29/Union Center) expressed skepticism about the bill by offering the example of a neighbor who summarily executed his sheep-killing dog with fencing pliers:
RHODEN: ...Now we create a felony — I’ll give you an extreme example on the other side. You know, there’s some characters in my country. A few years back a neighbor came to another neighbor, who was fencing in the ditch with his dog alongside, and he informed him that he lost some sheep the night before and he thought it was his dog that had done it. He said, well, I don’t think it was my dog. And he said, yeah, I really think it was. The rancher walked over and grabbed his dog — called his dog over, and opened his mouth, and there was wool in his teeth. He said, ‘I’ll be damned, you’re right,’ he took his fencing pliers, and killed him — killed the dog.
REP. ANNE HAJEK: I think that is already addressed, in terms of if the animal is going after livestock.
RHODEN: He wasn’t. But, you read the statute, intentionally, willfully and maliciously inflicted death on the animal.
HAJEK: I don’t feel really good about what he did. Maybe you do, but I don’t.
RHODEN: It was humane. But that’s my point. The dog was killed instantly. But who interprets that?
STATE VETERINARIAN DUSTIN OEDEKOVEN (a proponent of the animal cruelty law): Humane killing is defined [transcript by David Montgomery, "Rhoden, the Dog, and the Fencing Pliers," Political Smokeout, 2014.01.18].
Have all the fun you like with the headline. But let's also remind Senator and candidate Rhoden to read the actual bill. Senate Bill 46 exempts his pliers-wielding neighbor with this exact language:
In addition, the following are exempt from the provisions of this chapter and chapter 40-2:
- Any usual and customary practice;
- In the production of food, feed, or fiber, including all aspects of the livestock industry;
- In the boarding, breeding, competition, exhibition, feeding, raising, service work, showing, training, transportation, and use of animals; or
- In the harvesting of animals for food or byproducts;
- Any humane killing of an animal;
- Any lawful hunting, trapping, fishing, or other activity authorized by the South Dakota Department of Game, Fish and Parks;
- Any lawful pest, vermin, predator, and animal damage control, including the disposition of wild animals;
- Any reasonable action taken by a person for the destruction or control of an animal known to be dangerous, a threat, or injurious to life, limb, or property; and
- Any actions taken by personnel or agents of the board, the Department of Agriculture, Department of Game, Fish and Parks, or the United States Department of Agriculture in the performance of duties as prescribed by law.
Rhoden's neighbor was destroying an animal known to be dangerous to property. Senate Bill 46 exempts his action from prosecution.
Senator Jim Bradford (D-27/Pine Ridge) chimes in with what appears to be a concern that by making animal cruelty a felony, Senate Bill 46 might prevent ranchers who unnecessarily beat their dogs or other creatures from running for office. I would suggest that, with or without Senate Bill 46, Bradford, Rhoden, and others might have to accept not beating their animals—and not making approving speeches about neighbors killing dogs with pliers—as a small price of running for office.
Fencing pliers to kill a dog---, forceps in abortion to dismember a living human being. Welcome to SD.
And I should add this... pentobarbital to kill those on death row. I'm told pentobarbital doesn't stop you from feeling. So, though they can't move in any way including their lungs, they still feel the burning and the suffocation. Kind of like putting them in a big vacuum packed zip locked bag.
Using Monsanto to kill the Earth: welcome to South Dakota.
Cancer caused by industrial agriculture kills hundreds in the state every year: where IS Marty Jackley anyway? Oh yeah: taking money to keep it quiet.
Indeed. The dog had it coming.
This bill has the grudznick stamp of approval.
What kind of West River rancher isn't carrying a sidearm or a rifle in the pickup?
grudz-if you start talking taters and gravy,the whitecoats will be coming for you,pretty pronto.
Legalize industrial hemp and our cancer rates will go down. Monsanto won't like that.
Congress has ended funding for USDA inspection for horse slaughter plants and New Mexico is making it impossible for an abattoir here. South Dakota law is meaningless on the Rosebud where a plant has been proposed, same in the Navajo Nation. My dad killed a sow with a claw hammer but he did not commit a felony.
That Bob Newland was convicted of felony possession is outrageous compared to killing a dog with a pliers.
Pardon my friend Bob, and Mexican statehood for the tribes too!
Larry, watching a man truly skilled with fencing pliers is a joy to behold. To wield them in such a manner must have taken great skill and practice.
Rev. Hickey,
How many legal or illegal abortions were there in South Dakota in 2013?
Does killing a sheep-killing dog with fencing pliers act as a deterrent to other sheep-killing dogs or does it give the sheep's relatives the satisfaction of knowing that killing a killer to prove that killing is wrong is gonna do the sheep any good at the butcher shop?
Mike, I'd say it prevents others property from being destroyed. If you have a beast that is taking my property, I would hope a man like Mr. Rhoden's neighbor would step up and stop it.
What an excellent explanation Grudz.... What size of fencing pliers will it require to slay the beast called TransCanada...?
That poor beast was framed and murdered in cold blood. Without any DNA evidence to prove that wool in the deceased's mouth came from the sheep it allegedly killed,there was no reason not to suspect the party of the second part having fed wool to the accused killer. The deceased's rights were violated and the executioner risked bodily injury to take the life of what might well be an innocent victim of a really bad annecdotal story told to waste time in Pierre. The defense rests.
Rep. Hickey,
You voted along party lines on SB 36 last year. That doesn't bode well for your anti-death penalty bill.
Plus, a fetus can't feel pain until 24 gestational weeks. When abortions are performed on a fetus that is 20 weeks or older, a shot is given to it's heart to stop it. So when a women has a later-term abortion, she is delivering a fetus that has already passed. When you see pictures of dismembered fetus's, they are already gone and don't feel anything,
I'd vote the same way again on SB36. And some studies show babies feel pain at 8 weeks. It's a matter of basic human compassion. We wouldn't pull the wing off a little bird if it was alive.
Oh no! Please don't get started on the anti-choice rants! Stop now, before it's too late!
I want to know why I can't shoot and bury people who look at me funny. What if I stab them in the heart first with a syringe full of painkiller? Then it will be humane when I shoot them because it won't hurt. I have a right to choose to not be annoyed by other people.
Bree S- emulate wingnut pols who don't like to be annoyed by the public-ignore them. What makes you think your rights trump anyone else's rights?
Bree, Senate Bill 46 would not let you take such action against an animal. No moral principle would let you take such an action against a human being. Let's not equate absurdity with reality. If the conversation about Senate Bill 46 remains focused on what it really addresses, it should find widespread agreement. Larry Rhoden, Betty Olson, and others who don't want this law have to resort to extremes to keep from talking about the sensible nature of this legislation and the fact that we South Dakotans are the extremists for not making animal cruelty a felony.
Anti-choice extremists are all about killing and violence: pro-life is a dog whistle signalling the decline in the rates of white people breeding.
The problem I see with Senate Bill 46 is that Livestock is defined as "any agricultural or commercial animal owned, bred, or raised for profit, but not including dogs, cats, rabbits, or other household pets" and section 40-2-4 says "Except as provided in chapter 40-1, the activities of any humane society incorporated pursuant to this chapter for the prevention of inhumane treatment of neglect, abandonment, mistreatment, or cruelty to animals, as provided in chapter 40-1 or this chapter, are limited to animals other than cattle, horses, sheep, swine, and other livestock." That makes it sound like horses are not subject to regulation under this bill but that isn't the case because horses can be defined as both livestock and pets by definition.
Only horses "owned, bred, and raised for profit" would be clearly exempt from the statute. My horses, who certainly don't make me any money, would not be considered livestock.
"Neglect" is defined as "to fail to provide food, water, protection from the elements, adequate sanitation, adequate facilities, or care generally considered to be standard and accepted for an animal's health and well-being consistent with the species, breed, physical condition, and type of animal." This is very open to interpretation and since any three wacko animal rights activists who think horses are abused if they pull a carriage can incorporate as a humane society and receive police powers under this statute - some left wing humane society member can impound my horses and have me charged with a misdemeanor for neglect because they don't think a shelter belt is "protection from the elements" or "adequate facilities."
Also, it is a felony to "for amusement or gain cause animal to fight with another animal or cause animal to injure another animal" and only hunting that is "authorized by the South Dakota Department of Game, Fish and Parks" is exempt from the statute. That means training and using hunting dogs to kill foxes, coyotes, wolves etc. for sport would be a felony unless specifically permitted by GFP, which I don't think it is because I can only find the hunting of mountain lions as mentioned to be legal in GFP regulations.
Torture as defined by christians: priceless.
Also, my dog won't use a dog house, Ive bought a few and he doesn't like them. He's a mountain dog and likes to lay out in the snow. He doesn't have a dog house, so a humane society member could impound my dog and have me charged with a misdemeanor for not having "protection from the elements." Of course he comes in the house too but a busy body animal activist wouldn't care about that. I should note that if your pet is impounded you are required to pay them boarding fees. If a city needs to make money and is going broke they start fining people for everything and not just speeding tickets. Even if whatever reason they come up with to impound your pet is bogus and gets thrown out of court, you're still out hundreds of dollars in boarding fees for some animal prison full of dangerous strays. It's a financing racket to cover the cost of catching and euthanizing the stray wild dogs, and your pets will be returned to you shellshocked like they've just been through WWIII. They don't care if the charges are actually valid because they get to keep the overcharged boarding fees not to mention the shots they will give them without your permission that they will charge you for even though your pets are up to date with the vet.
"Aerial gunning involves shooting animals from low-flying aircraft on private and public lands. The federal government (USDA -- Wildlife Services), states (Wyoming and South Dakota), and private individuals engage in these practices -- often at taxpayers' expense. Killing a coyote from the air costs between $185 and $805 per animal [1]."
http://www.wildearthguardians.org/site/PageServer?pagename=priorities_wildlife_war_wildlife_kill_methods_aerial
That story is Effin disgusting. This guy a rancher or Jeffrey Dahmer? Hell, a quick bullet to the head would have been more kind than that death. We should create some new states: East Dakota and West Dakota. I just don't understand west river at all.
Can I shoot poachers?
Okay Q whatever you say....
http://rapidcityjournal.com/news/burbank-man-reaches-plea-deal-in-dog-killing-case/article_537b9100-c6d3-11e0-97dc-001cc4c002e0.html
In South Dakota you kill almost any damn thing you choose!
Kill a dog.
Kill a mountain lion
Kill a deer
Kill a pheasant
Kill condemned murders
Kill Kill Kill
Or how about this Q?
http://www.sdfact.org/recent-abuse-cases-in-sd.html
can you say PROFILING.....
need more of this hammerin....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HTvr79Oe5w8