Minnesota’s pound seizure law allows research and educational institutions to claim unredeemed animals held in publicly funded shelters for experimentation. Enacted in 1949, Minnesota’s pound seizure law should be repealed because 1) it hurts Minnesota citizens and pets, 2) it does not enjoy widespread social or political acceptance, 3) it is not being used by the institutions it was designed to benefit, and 4) the reasons for its passage no longer exist.

Pound Seizure Hurts Minnesota Citizens and Pets

• Pound seizure hurts Minnesota families
  Pound seizure not only harms pets; it also adversely affects the lives of Minnesotans and their families. As long as pound seizure remains lawful, the work of both public and private animal shelters is jeopardized. Who will take a lost animal to a shelter to be reunited with his or her family knowing the shelter may be required to turn the animal over to a research institution? What family facing foreclosure, unemployment, or bankruptcy will surrender the pet they can no longer care for to a shelter from which a researcher may claim their beloved pet?
  
  
• Pound seizure hurts public trust and confidence in
  animal shelters
  In the current economic climate, public trust and confidence in our state’s animal shelters have never been more important. Many family pets are being surrendered to animal shelters because families can no longer afford to care for them. These families experience the double anguish of surrendering a family pet and knowing that the pet may be killed in a painful experiment. In communities with pound seizure, people often choose to abandon animals they cannot keep rather than send them to a laboratory via the local shelter, thus adding to the problem of homeless, stray animals. In Los Angeles, after the repeal of pound seizure, the number of animals brought into shelters increased steadily. Banning pound seizure ensures the state will not impede the work of animal shelters in reuniting lost pets with their families and finding new homes for abandoned and surrendered animals. A pound seizure ban will cost the state nothing, yet the benefits to the people of Minnesota — the workers in animal shelters and the citizens who place their trust and confidence in them — are immeasurable.
  
  
• Pound seizure places a burden on municipal animal control departments and officers
  Pound seizure places an unfair burden on animal control officers whose duty it is to safeguard human and animal life. The National Animal Control Association (NACA) opposes pound seizure because such laws “hinder the efforts of progressive animal shelters to promote animal welfare in a collective atmosphere of public trust."

Pound Seizure Does Not Enjoy Widespread Social or Political Acceptance

Pound seizure has been squarely rejected by at least three Minnesota cities including its two largest, Minneapolis and St. Paul. Both the Minneapolis City Council and the St. Paul City Council have enacted resolutions that direct their animal shelters not to release impounded animals to research institutions. Pine City’s animal control ordinance also states that impounded animals shall not be surrendered for research purposes. In a recent survey of 271 Minnesota city ordinances, only 102 mentioned pound seizure. The failure of so many Minnesota cities to embrace pound seizure in their ordinances is evidence of the ineffectiveness of the law as an expression of public policy. More importantly, it means that animal control ordinances vary widely from city to city. Such variation from city to city in the law governing animals means that the fate of a missing or lost family pet may be determined simply by which direction a pet runs when the pet is lost. A law that produces such uneven results for pets and pet owners throughout our state is not a good law.

Pound Seizure is not being Used by the Institutions it was Designed to Benefit

Banning pound seizure will not adversely affect research in Minnesota. Banning pound seizure will not mean animals cannot be used for research in Minnesota — it means only animals housed in Minnesota shelters and pounds may not be used for research. Banning pound seizure will have no affect on research in Minnesota because data from the Board of Animal Health and the University of Minnesota show the law is not even being used.

The Minnesota Board of Animal Health reports that only three institutions are registered to receive animals under the law — none of these institutions requisitioned animals during the period 2001-2006. The University of Minnesota has confirmed it took only six animals from pounds during the period 2000-2005. These six animals represent less than 1% of the 1418 dogs and cats “used by or under control of (the U’s) research facility” in 2005 alone. In a letter dated December 18, 2007, the University of Minnesota stated, “The University of Minnesota does not acquire animals from pounds or shelters in the State of Minnesota under the Minnesota Pound Seizure law.”

Ending pound seizure will not stop research — it will simply change the source of some animals used for some projects.

The Reasons for Enacting Minnesota’s Pound Seizure Law No Longer Exist

The original intent of the pound seizure law was to protect pets. In 1949, there was no federal law that established a system of classifications and regulations governing individuals who bought and sold animals for research. As a result, family pets were being stolen and sold to scientific and educational institutions for research. Lawmakers reasoned that animal thieves would be put out of business and family pets would be safe if researchers could rely on pounds as a source of animals. It was not until 1966 when in response to the national problem of dognapping the Animal Welfare Act (AWA) was enacted to create a federally regulated system under which researchers could legally obtain animals. Since inception of the AWA, universities, medical facilities, and other institutions that use animals for research have the assurance that any animals they need for research may be acquired legally through federally regulated dealers. Enactment of the AWA signaled the beginning of the end of pound seizure in many states. In 2009, local pounds are no longer needed as a source for research animals.