Monday letters: Bill puts interests of vets ahead of pets

As a resident, property owner and a small-business owner, I am very disappointed that Senate Bill 687 is even is being discussed. What is more important — the salaries of veterinarians, or homeless animals?

If this bill is passed, it will increase South Carolina’s already very high killing rate of homeless cats and dogs. Who will end up paying for more animals in our county shelters? The taxpayers.

I spend thousands of dollars with my local veterinarian for my personal cats and dogs and believe that all companion pets should have access to care. If a private vet is not willing to serve an animal based on the owner’s ability to pay, the owner should have the right to use a not-for-profit that is willing to.

S.687 restricts the services that not-for-profits can provide and who they can serve and limits access to care via mobile vaccine programs. These provisions suggest that the goal is to protect the profits of private vets. This bill is harmful to companion pets and is a poor reflection of private veterinarians. Can you imagine if we took this same position with children who need medical care?

Sixty-two percent of South Carolinians have pets. Do we protect the profits of a few private vets at the risk of hurting a million S.C. families who have pets?

This story was originally published July 26, 2015 at 7:27 PM.