SD to require health certificates

sdcardis · Feb 19, 2011

I think you all may be taking this a little too lightly. And it sounds to me like each one of you has probably committed a felony.

Are you aware that South Dakota law requires you to obtain DUPLICATE health certificates, file one ahead of time in Pierre so that it arrives before your dogs do, and carry the other duplicate attached to a bill of lading that accompanies your dog. Failure to do all of those things is a Class 6 felony, punishable by 2 years in prison, a $4,000 fine, or both. The statute they are talking about is SDCL 40-14-2. That's the one that the vet is extending from commercial livestock to all animals.

Also, those of you who just have your vet fax you a certificate without an exam are committing another crime in SD by submitting a fraudulent health certificate.

Just something to think about.

Waterdogs · Feb 19, 2011

Is South Dakota one of the few states that do this as far as dogs? I am going to be guiding their for the month of October and November so I guess I better mind my Ps and Qs .

EdA · Feb 19, 2011

It is one thing to pass the law, yet another to enforce it, I hope the state budget provides the funds for the necessay staffing, handling the paperwork
alone could be daunting if there is widespread compliance.

sdcardis · Feb 19, 2011

@EdA: Ah, but that's part of it. The State Vet office is claiming authority to force local clubs to enforce the law for them. AND they also took it upon themselves to extend the health certificate requirement to all animals entering an event, whether in-state or not. So the next time you enter a field trial, for example, the vet's office claims the club is required to check that your dogs have certificates, etc. This is now an issue because the state vet's office made a "friendly warning" call to one of the kennel clubs talking about felony charges if they did not require health certificates of all dogs (whether in-state or coming in from out of state) entered in an upcoming agility trial.

sdcardis · Feb 19, 2011

@Waterdogs: It's not unusual in requiring a heath certificate, although that seems to be routinely ignored elsewhere. It is unusual in requiring prior filing, etc, for pets.

Eric Johnson · Feb 19, 2011

sdcardis;753950 It is unusual in requiring prior filing said:
That's not at all true. Alabama has the same requirement. I believe that this is an area covered by an interstate compact which means multiple (most or all?) states have some version of the requirement.

What the SD law sets up is an event in which folks bring the health certificate with them and the Animal Industry Board shows up with a shoebox full of these and verifies that they have recieved the advance copy.

This provision of the law has been widely ignored. What may be happening is that one or more state vets have AR leanings and have decided to use this to create havoc.

This really same requirement for a puppy making an airline flight to have a health certificate except that this is being done on a huge scale.

Eric

sdcardis · Feb 21, 2011

@Eric Johnson:

But Alabama has an exception. According to the website for the Alabama Department of Agriculture & Industries:

"This section does not apply to any dog or cat which is imported into the state for exhibition purposes and which does not remain in the state for more than 21 days. No dog or domesticated cat infested with screwworms shall be shipped or otherwise imported into Alabama for any purpose. "

And the requirements apply only to dogs coming into Alabama that don't meet the exceptions. SD is trying to impose a health certificate requirement on dogs already IN the state whenever they participate in dog sports.

Alabama's exception is in line with many states, the majority of which either have no such requirement or have exceptions for short term presence, exhibition, or transit.

Buzz · Feb 21, 2011

sdcardis said:
I think you all may be taking this a little too lightly. And it sounds to me like each one of you has probably committed a felony.

Are you aware that South Dakota law requires you to obtain DUPLICATE health certificates, file one ahead of time in Pierre so that it arrives before your dogs do, and carry the other duplicate attached to a bill of lading that accompanies your dog. Failure to do all of those things is a Class 6 felony, punishable by 2 years in prison, a $4,000 fine, or both. The statute they are talking about is SDCL 40-14-2. That's the one that the vet is extending from commercial livestock to all animals.

Also, those of you who just have your vet fax you a certificate without an exam are committing another crime in SD by submitting a fraudulent health certificate.

Just something to think about.

This could throw a serious wrench into our yearly field trial in Hartford.

MarkyMark · Feb 21, 2011

Doesn't your vet have to physically examine your dog before they write the HC?

EdA · Feb 21, 2011

Buzz said:
This could throw a serious wrench into our yearly field trial in Hartford.

well at least it is a good way to eliminate the competition....;-)

and South Dakota claims to be sportsman friendly......

sdcardis · Feb 21, 2011

@Buzz: Just so.

@EdA: Certainly making it hard to have any competition. They are saying it also applies to dogs already in SD who enter events in SD. And that the club has to hire a vet to be there during the event to check the dogs, which makes it almost prohibitively expensive to have events (or jacks up the entry fees).

EdA · Feb 21, 2011

sdcardis said:
@Buzz: Just so.

@EdA: Certainly making it hard to have any competition. They are saying it also applies to dogs already in SD who enter events in SD. And that the club has to hire a vet to be there during the event to check the dogs, which makes it almost prohibitively expensive to have events (or jacks up the entry fees).

so who is behind this legislation and why?

Eric Johnson · Feb 21, 2011

Ed-

The law and administrative code are not new. As best I recall, they are 20 years old...maybe older.

What seems to be new is a state employee (a vet?) in the area who has "discovered" the law and decided to enforce it.

Eric

EdA · Feb 21, 2011

Eric Johnson said:
Ed-

The law and administrative code are not new. As best I recall, they are 20 years old...maybe older.

What seems to be new is a state employee (a vet?) in the area who has "discovered" the law and decided to enforce it.

Eric

Hopefully someone with some authority and some common sense will point out to said person the potential economic loss from enforcing regulations unprecedented anywhere else in the country

Buzz · Feb 21, 2011

EdA said:
well at least it is a good way to eliminate the competition....;-)

Sounds like a plan!

Eric Johnson · Feb 22, 2011

EdA said:
Hopefully someone with some authority and some common sense will point out to said person the potential economic loss from enforcing regulations unprecedented anywhere else in the country

There is speculation that this is being pushed by animal rights folks who see it as a way to reduce event participation.

Eric

EdA · Feb 22, 2011

Eric Johnson said:
There is speculation that this is being pushed by animal rights folks who see it as a way to reduce event participation.

Eric

Perhaps no one has considered the economic impact of pheasant hunting, somewhere I read 100,000 non resident small game licenses, that's over 10 million in licenses alone, and how many of those bring dogs, stupid, stupid, stupid!

I hunt 10 days, requires 2 licenses, and I spend an additional $2500 +\- in state depending on how much I spend at Cabela's, I bring 3-4 dogs and all of my friends bring dogs too, I wonder if the geniuses in Pierre have considered any of that.....

Marvin S · Feb 22, 2011

EdA said:
Perhaps no one has considered the economic impact of pheasant hunting, somewhere I read 100,000 non resident small game licenses, that's over 10 million in licenses alone, and how many of those bring dogs, stupid, stupid, stupid!

I hunt 10 days, requires 2 licenses, and I spend an additional $2500 +\- in state depending on how much I spend at Cabela's, I bring 3-4 dogs and all of my friends bring dogs too, I wonder if the geniuses in Pierre have considered any of that.....

Most political animals don't own working dogs! & when I was younger we drove the cornfields without dogs, still managed to get our 7 birds a day limit

.

But I'm reasonably sure the folks in SD recognize the financial impact. I always was impressed by a guy who could show up with 2 or 3 guns & ammo to spare, now I'm that guy also

.

Shane Olean · Feb 23, 2011

sdcardis - my email is shane@smokendakotakennels.com send me an email so we can chat about this if you would...

Thanks

Eric Johnson · Mar 2, 2011

I picked this up today off another list.

********
From Sioux Empire KC:

"Members of our local kennel club ( Sioux Empire KC) traveled to Pierre today to meet with the state vet, representatives, a policy advisor, states attorney and the Lt. Gov. to discuss the requirement for exhibitors to supply a health certificate our shows. I'm very pleased to announce that the meeting went very well! We will NOT be collecting health certificates at our upcoming agility trial in April. It won't be required. The show will go on as planned, so please spread the word!!

Also, the states attorney is working on making/writing an exception for our fall show in Oct. The codified laws will be changed during the next legislative session. The state vet agreed that the law needs to be changed!
***************

I would guess that details will be forth-coming. It's still not clear what impact the earlier or this ruling will have on hunters but this is a step in the right direction.

Eric

SD to require health certificates

sdcardis

Waterdogs

EdA

sdcardis

sdcardis

Eric Johnson

sdcardis

Buzz

MarkyMark

EdA

sdcardis

EdA

Eric Johnson

EdA

Buzz

Eric Johnson

EdA

Marvin S

Shane Olean

Eric Johnson

Top Contributors this Month

Recommended Communities