Senate panel hears bill to criminalize harassment and harm of service animals

Senate Bill 300, introduced by Senator Denley Logie, received wide public testimony Feb. 24 on measures to expand protections for service animals and their handlers, including criminalizing harassment, unauthorized control and creating restitution for harm to an animal whose work is essential to a person with a disability.

Proponents described service animals as medically essential partners whose injury or retirement can remove a person's independence for months or years. Jacob Krizovich, advocacy and public policy chair for the National Federation of the Blind of Montana, told senators that 44% of guide-dog handlers have suffered an attack and 89% reported interference while the dog was working; he said Montana and West Virginia are the only states without statutory protections of the kind the bill proposes. Multiple service-animal handlers described attacks and long replacement times; a guide-dog handler, George Kerscher, recounted two attacks during 26 years of team work and urged passage.

Health- and disability-advocacy groups — including Summit Independent Living, North Central Independent Living Services, the National Federation of the Blind (state chapters), Disability Rights Montana and Assistance Dogs International providers — and multiple individual handlers testified in favor. Testimony highlighted costly training (thousands of dollars per dog), the time required to replace or retrain an animal, and the emotional and functional disruption when a service animal is harmed. Center for independent living representatives and veterans' groups also supported the bill, and providers said that restitution would help cover veterinary bills, retraining and replacement costs.

Witnesses also said the law would complement 2019 Montana statutes that target misrepresentation of service animals and would provide an educational element to increase public understanding and respectful behavior. Supporters urged the committee to pass the bill, citing the disproportionate harm experienced by disabled Montanans when service animals are injured.

Opposition was limited in the hearing record; testimony and committee discussion focused on definitions (which animals are covered, what constitutes harassment) and ensuring existing vicious-dog statutes remain applicable where appropriate. Senator McGillivray asked why an attack could not already be prosecuted under existing vicious-dog laws; the sponsor acknowledged such statutes exist but said this bill would provide additional remedies specific to handlers and service animals.

Ending: After extensive proponent testimony, Senator Logie closed the hearing. Committee members and the sponsor signaled willingness to refine statutory language (definitions and interaction with existing vicious-dog law) before any vote.