Tweet
MA Moves Closer to Vocational Licensing
Bill calls for state board to regulate pet groomers; Would ban drying device alleged to have killed Rockport dog
http://www.gloucestertimes.com/punew...8063914?page=0
Massachusetts could be the first state in the Union to license pet groomers and ban drying cages like the one alleged to have killed a Rockport greyhound in Gloucester last year if a bill filed by a state senator becomes law.
The Senate bill, introduced earlier this year by Republican Sen. Richard Tisei, R-Wakefield, at the behest of a constituent unrelated to the Gloucester incident, would create a five-member licensing board, four of whom would be groomers with at least five years of experience. It would also ban so-called drying boxes, which are used to dry animals after they are bathed.
Currently, pet groomers in Massachusetts - or any other state - do not have to be licensed by local or state officials.
"I was surprised that there's no type of training at all required for the pet grooming profession," Tisei said in an interview yesterday with the Times. "We certify and regulate most professions, in that we have basic standards for training. It seems as though anyone can put up a shingle and say they're a dog groomer."
Richard LeBlond, a deputy chief with the Massachusetts Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, said groomers are not required to be licensed in the commonwealth.
"They can just open up," he said.
According to Gloucester City Clerk Robert Whynott and Public Health Agent Jack Vondras, Gloucester does not require groomers to be licensed to operate in the city.
The oversight board proposed by Tisei would be charged with issuing three types of licenses based on grooming duties performed and years of experience. Each type of license would require a set number of hours of training or apprenticeship and would have to be renewed every two years.
No licensing fees are listed in the bill, but they would be set by the state panel should the proposal become law. Tisei said he did not specifically limit who the fifth member of the board would be "because I believe the industry should police itself. This is modeled after other boards and commissions," he said.
Animal advocates and some members of the grooming industry are not opposed to Tisei's bill. Jay Stull, a spokesman for Canine Political Action Corps, a national advocacy group for dog professions based in Foristell, Mo., said having groomers on a regulatory board is important and Tisei's bill is the best attempt to license an industry that is completely unlicensed nationwide.
"This is one of the first ones that has the entire board to oversee the licensing process as groomers, which I think is marvelous," Stull said. "It forces the industry to self-regulate under the supervision of the state."
There are licensing proposals before the legislatures in New Hampshire, New York, Pennsylvania and California.
Robyn McNair, owner of Robyn's Dog Grooming on Main Street in Gloucester, said she believes groomers should be licensed and monitored so customers have recourse if their groomer has multiple or recurring problems.
"I would want somewhere to go and have complaints investigated to make sure shops are being run up to par," McNair said.
She added that having groomers on the licensing panel "makes me feel much better because we've all been there (in dealing with complaints)."
The bill would also ban the use of drying cages, which are enclosed devices that use forced hot air to speed up drying.
One groomer in Gloucester, the Barking Lot on Main Street, is being sued in Gloucester District Court following the death of a Rockport couple's pet greyhound, Riva, last May after being in a drying cage. The suit alleges that Rosey Lourenco, owner of the Barking Lot, put Riva in a drying box and forgot her.
Nancy Waddell, of Prospect Street in Rockport, returned several hours later last May 5 to retrieve Riva, but found her lying and shaking on the groomer's floor, panting and unable to stand.
LeBlond said the investigation into Riva's death, conducted by MSPCA agent Martha Parkhurst immediately following the incident, concluded no criminal wrongdoing. Jamie Levie, the Gloucester Police Department's animal control officer, also investigated and decided not to bring criminal charges.
According to both the Waddells and Patricia Johnstone, Lourenco's attorney, an intent to harm or kill the animal is required to bring a criminal charge.
Johnstone told the Times last week she and Lourenco believe the civil suit, filed April 5, is "a baseless and frivolous lawsuit."
Several groomers in the city contacted by the Times said they do not use enclosed drying cages.
"We don't use them. I like to do things more hands-on," said Julie Borge, owner of K-9 Cuts on Center Street.
Her husband, Troy Petrillo, said K-9 Cuts, which has been in business for 16 years, has never used drying cages.
"They're nice tools if they're used properly, but we're a smaller operation, more hands-on, and we feel it's important to give our clients that kind of service," he said.
McNair said she has not used any enclosed drying devices in her 20 years as a groomer.
"I wouldn't use one of those units if you paid me," she said. "I think it's an accident waiting to happen."
While she uses dryers on her clients' dogs, they are put in grated cages, rather than an enclosed box, in which Riva was allegedly placed, according to the suit. The heat setting is never above medium, and her staff is instructed to check on each cage every 20 minutes, McNair added.
Waddell said she filed the suit for "accountability" because she believed Lourenco tried to rush her out of the Barking Lot without explaining what happened to Riva and never accepted responsibility for Riva's death or apologized. Riva died in the office of Dr. Jeffrey French that day with a temperature of 108.9 degrees, the veterinarian told the Waddells.
McNair said she felt bad for both the Waddells, who lost their pet, and Lourenco as a fellow groomer.
Waddell did not ask for specific damages in the court complaint, but said anything she is awarded above and beyond costs - for an attorney, court filings and a $700 necropsy performed by Tufts University Grafton Small Animal Hospital - will go to Greyhound Adoption Service, the Salisbury group where she got Riva, and to Best Friends, an animal sanctuary in Kanab, Utah.
Stull said he opposes the portion of Tisei's bill banning drying boxes because "the problem is not the heated dryer, the problem, assuming the accusation is correct, is the groomer." Stull is not familiar with the case and said he is not passing judgment on who is responsible for Riva's death.
Next week, Stull said he plans to meet with Tisei's staff to discuss the bill. Tisei said he is "not married" to the drying cage ban, but wanted it in the bill to draw attention to the devices as an issue.
What Tisei's bill would do:
* Create a board of five people, four of whom are groomers, to issue licenses for pet groomers.
* Charges the board to regulate examinations, sanitary rules and apprenticeships for groomers.
* Create an examination for the three kinds of licenses based on hours of training: bathers and brushers, 80 hours; basic groomers, 300 hours; master and teacher groomers, 600 hours.
* Require groomers to reapply for licensing every two years.
* Require groomers to maintain records of pets, their owners and dates of service.
* Require groomers to be insured.
* Create a list of licensed groomers available to the public.
* Grandfather groomers in business for longer than five years from taking the required examination for a license.
http://www.gloucestertimes.com/punew...8063914?page=0
Massachusetts could be the first state in the Union to license pet groomers and ban drying cages like the one alleged to have killed a Rockport greyhound in Gloucester last year if a bill filed by a state senator becomes law.
The Senate bill, introduced earlier this year by Republican Sen. Richard Tisei, R-Wakefield, at the behest of a constituent unrelated to the Gloucester incident, would create a five-member licensing board, four of whom would be groomers with at least five years of experience. It would also ban so-called drying boxes, which are used to dry animals after they are bathed.
Currently, pet groomers in Massachusetts - or any other state - do not have to be licensed by local or state officials.
"I was surprised that there's no type of training at all required for the pet grooming profession," Tisei said in an interview yesterday with the Times. "We certify and regulate most professions, in that we have basic standards for training. It seems as though anyone can put up a shingle and say they're a dog groomer."
Richard LeBlond, a deputy chief with the Massachusetts Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, said groomers are not required to be licensed in the commonwealth.
"They can just open up," he said.
According to Gloucester City Clerk Robert Whynott and Public Health Agent Jack Vondras, Gloucester does not require groomers to be licensed to operate in the city.
The oversight board proposed by Tisei would be charged with issuing three types of licenses based on grooming duties performed and years of experience. Each type of license would require a set number of hours of training or apprenticeship and would have to be renewed every two years.
No licensing fees are listed in the bill, but they would be set by the state panel should the proposal become law. Tisei said he did not specifically limit who the fifth member of the board would be "because I believe the industry should police itself. This is modeled after other boards and commissions," he said.
Animal advocates and some members of the grooming industry are not opposed to Tisei's bill. Jay Stull, a spokesman for Canine Political Action Corps, a national advocacy group for dog professions based in Foristell, Mo., said having groomers on a regulatory board is important and Tisei's bill is the best attempt to license an industry that is completely unlicensed nationwide.
"This is one of the first ones that has the entire board to oversee the licensing process as groomers, which I think is marvelous," Stull said. "It forces the industry to self-regulate under the supervision of the state."
There are licensing proposals before the legislatures in New Hampshire, New York, Pennsylvania and California.
Robyn McNair, owner of Robyn's Dog Grooming on Main Street in Gloucester, said she believes groomers should be licensed and monitored so customers have recourse if their groomer has multiple or recurring problems.
"I would want somewhere to go and have complaints investigated to make sure shops are being run up to par," McNair said.
She added that having groomers on the licensing panel "makes me feel much better because we've all been there (in dealing with complaints)."
The bill would also ban the use of drying cages, which are enclosed devices that use forced hot air to speed up drying.
One groomer in Gloucester, the Barking Lot on Main Street, is being sued in Gloucester District Court following the death of a Rockport couple's pet greyhound, Riva, last May after being in a drying cage. The suit alleges that Rosey Lourenco, owner of the Barking Lot, put Riva in a drying box and forgot her.
Nancy Waddell, of Prospect Street in Rockport, returned several hours later last May 5 to retrieve Riva, but found her lying and shaking on the groomer's floor, panting and unable to stand.
LeBlond said the investigation into Riva's death, conducted by MSPCA agent Martha Parkhurst immediately following the incident, concluded no criminal wrongdoing. Jamie Levie, the Gloucester Police Department's animal control officer, also investigated and decided not to bring criminal charges.
According to both the Waddells and Patricia Johnstone, Lourenco's attorney, an intent to harm or kill the animal is required to bring a criminal charge.
Johnstone told the Times last week she and Lourenco believe the civil suit, filed April 5, is "a baseless and frivolous lawsuit."
Several groomers in the city contacted by the Times said they do not use enclosed drying cages.
"We don't use them. I like to do things more hands-on," said Julie Borge, owner of K-9 Cuts on Center Street.
Her husband, Troy Petrillo, said K-9 Cuts, which has been in business for 16 years, has never used drying cages.
"They're nice tools if they're used properly, but we're a smaller operation, more hands-on, and we feel it's important to give our clients that kind of service," he said.
McNair said she has not used any enclosed drying devices in her 20 years as a groomer.
"I wouldn't use one of those units if you paid me," she said. "I think it's an accident waiting to happen."
While she uses dryers on her clients' dogs, they are put in grated cages, rather than an enclosed box, in which Riva was allegedly placed, according to the suit. The heat setting is never above medium, and her staff is instructed to check on each cage every 20 minutes, McNair added.
Waddell said she filed the suit for "accountability" because she believed Lourenco tried to rush her out of the Barking Lot without explaining what happened to Riva and never accepted responsibility for Riva's death or apologized. Riva died in the office of Dr. Jeffrey French that day with a temperature of 108.9 degrees, the veterinarian told the Waddells.
McNair said she felt bad for both the Waddells, who lost their pet, and Lourenco as a fellow groomer.
Waddell did not ask for specific damages in the court complaint, but said anything she is awarded above and beyond costs - for an attorney, court filings and a $700 necropsy performed by Tufts University Grafton Small Animal Hospital - will go to Greyhound Adoption Service, the Salisbury group where she got Riva, and to Best Friends, an animal sanctuary in Kanab, Utah.
Stull said he opposes the portion of Tisei's bill banning drying boxes because "the problem is not the heated dryer, the problem, assuming the accusation is correct, is the groomer." Stull is not familiar with the case and said he is not passing judgment on who is responsible for Riva's death.
Next week, Stull said he plans to meet with Tisei's staff to discuss the bill. Tisei said he is "not married" to the drying cage ban, but wanted it in the bill to draw attention to the devices as an issue.
What Tisei's bill would do:
* Create a board of five people, four of whom are groomers, to issue licenses for pet groomers.
* Charges the board to regulate examinations, sanitary rules and apprenticeships for groomers.
* Create an examination for the three kinds of licenses based on hours of training: bathers and brushers, 80 hours; basic groomers, 300 hours; master and teacher groomers, 600 hours.
* Require groomers to reapply for licensing every two years.
* Require groomers to maintain records of pets, their owners and dates of service.
* Require groomers to be insured.
* Create a list of licensed groomers available to the public.
* Grandfather groomers in business for longer than five years from taking the required examination for a license.
Comment