Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Animal Welfare Primates topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Subcommittee hears bill to ban private ownership of primates; bill tabled after testimony
Summary
The House Ag Subcommittee heard House Bill 1768 to prohibit private ownership of primates, received supportive testimony from animal-welfare groups and opposition from a private-ownership group, and voted to lay the bill on the table 10-0.
House Bill 1768, a measure to prohibit private ownership of primates except by qualified institutions, was presented and discussed Wednesday before the House Agriculture Subcommittee. Delegate Martinez introduced the bill and defended amendments; after testimony from animal-welfare groups and private-owner representatives the subcommittee voted 10-0 to lay the bill on the table.
The bill would bar private individuals from acquiring or possessing primates as pets while exempting registered research facilities, sanctuaries, zoological parks and similar entities that meet specified criteria; it would grandfather existing privately owned primates. Delegate Martinez said the measure aims to ‘‘promote animal welfare and protect public health and safety’’ by removing a private possession pathway that she described as ‘‘inhumane’’ and risky for emergency responders.
The bill drew broad support from animal-welfare organizations. Cheryl Crow, Virginia state director for the Humane Society of the United States, said written testimony submitted to the committee documented about 21 incidents in Virginia over the past 10 to 15 years involving privately kept primates biting or injuring people and that the state lacks a registry of private primate owners. ‘‘Our main concern is that there’s no current documentation or registry for owners of primates in the state,’’ Crow said.
Daphna Nakhmanovich of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals cited several reported attacks, including incidents in Chesapeake and Surry County, and said the bill ‘‘will only impact private ownership’’—not zoos or licensed sanctuaries. Tabitha Treloar of the Richmond SPCA also testified in favor, saying the measure protects both primates and people.
Opposition testimony came from Heidi Kroskey of the Virginia Animal Owners Alliance, who said the bill was ‘‘very anti-animal’’ and warned the legislation could raise legal and constitutional questions, including the possibility it would allow a locality to ‘‘impound’’ a companion primate in a private home—an outcome the patron said was not intended. Delegate Martinez told the committee that ‘‘impound’’ was not the bill’s intent and that the bill is designed to protect primates and owners.
After the committee’s questions and public testimony, the subcommittee adopted seven technical line amendments and then voted on a motion to lay the bill on the table. The clerk recorded the motion to lay HB 1768 on the table as passing on a 10–0 vote.
The bill’s sponsor and supporters said they plan stakeholder work and agency coordination before next year’s session to refine the policy and address concerns raised during testimony. The committee chair said he would send letters to appropriate agencies to prepare for work next year.
Ending: The bill was tabled, leaving its next steps to the patron and interested stakeholders; supporters said they intend to continue stakeholder outreach and drafting work for the following session.
