Bill would require outbreak notices
A canine respiratory disease outbreak that sickened Colorado dogs last fall is motivating state lawmakers to find a policy fix, but some pet care facilities say the proposed bill needs a lot more clarification to work.
House Bill 24-1354 would require licensed pet facilities to “make every reasonable attempt to notify” pet owners within 24 hours of the facility learning of an infectious-disease outbreak.
Rep. Leslie Herod, the Denver Democrat sponsoring the bill, said the bill was a response to the dog flu epidemic that hit Colorado in the fall.
There was an outbreak at her dog Clinton’s pet facility, which she learned about after she called to ask about the respiratory illness.
“I was then able to go to my vet and get information about how to properly protect my pet so that he didn’t become sick. And that’s what I did,” she said. “I’m grateful that I did not have to go through the thousands of dollars of expenses and the possible death of my pet and instead was able to take the proper precautions to keep them safe.”
The bill passed in the House on Thursday is now headed to the Senate.
It has no registered opposition, according to the lobbying report filed with the secretary of state’s office.
And although workers at pet care facilities say they understand the motive behind the bill, there’s still too much uncertainty about how it would be implemented and enforced.
Licensed pet facilities in Colorado already are required to follow cleaning and sanitation rules under the state’s Pet Animal Care and Facilities Act, said Jed Rosenberg, managing director at Beds-n-biscuits in Wheat Ridge.
Beds-n-biscuits staffers take precautionary measures such as requiring pet vaccinations and cleaning and disinfecting dog runs and water bowls daily or multiple times a day, Rosenberg said.
“We’re already doing the sorts of things to curb the spread of any virus or disease, and any reputable facility will notify owners of any sort of outbreak,” he said.
Rosenberg said he has a lot of questions about the bill’s current language, like what constitutes an outbreak — is it one dog or 10 dogs?
Will testing be required to confirm a diagnosis with illnesses such as kennel cough, where several viruses or bacteria could be the cause?
“A dog could be sneezing because of allergies,” Rosenberg said. “All in all I think this bill is a good thing, but in order for it to be successful there needs to be more language in it.”
Amy Hillis, leader of the Professional Animal Care Certification Council, a third-party certification group for pet care providers, said she also understands where lawmakers are coming from by wanting owners to have better information to protect their pets.
But the current version of the bill is too vague, Hillis said, and would be hard to enforce.
Hillis also pushed back on the idea that the respiratory disease that spread in the fall was mysterious or even novel.
Respiratory illness outbreaks are not uncommon, although state officials and veterinary experts are still determining why cases increased and dogs experienced worse-than-usual symptoms this fall.
Experts such as Scott Weese, a professor at the University of Guelph’s Ontario Veterinary College, have suggested that factors such as fewer pet vaccinations and less exposure to other animals during the pandemic spurred the outbreak.
Other factors could include more dogs overall and changes in the types of vaccines used, Weese wrote in a December post on his website.
At the end of the day, getting sick is sometimes just part of being alive, Hillis said.
“If you send your kids to school they’re probably going to get sick at some point, and that’s the nature of being a living thing,” she said. “That’s not a result of a building or a place; it’s a result of leaving your house.” “She worked (while) not feeling good a lot,” Tonilas said of those final months.
Tonilas and her brother thought long and hard about what to do with Beauty Inc. after their mother’s death.
In the end, they sensed headwinds that would make it difficult to keep a small business afloat in the face of a changing retail landscape and other forces they couldn’t control. Like a global pandemic — which it had already survived, but not without some bumps and bruises.
On March 19, 2020, Gov. Jared Polis ordered a six-week closure of all hair salons in the state.
“COVID was a severe impact on hair salons,” Tonilas said. “That was the start of the nail in the coffin for Beauty Inc.”
Some customers never came back, she said, having learned to style or color their hair at home while in lockdown. And of the customers whose loyalty brought them back to Beauty Inc. as soon the business was allowed to reopen, Father Time was not on their side.
“The clientele has decreased over the last few years,” Tonilas said. “A lot of the customers are older or have passed away.”
Add to that an ongoing labor shortage and a historic run-up in property taxes in Colorado, and Tonilas said it became evident that it was time to shut the doors.
The closure of Beauty Inc. at the same time it marks its 60th anniversary is a bittersweet confluence of events, Tonilas said. But the business’ longevity under her mother’s leadership is something she is immensely proud of.
“I think it’s significant for a business to celebrate 60 years,” she said. “There are not many businesses these days that last for 60 years.”