They got the reason.
http://huntingtactical.com/blog/why-the ... arge-bill/
S3440-A YOUNG Same as A 7220-A Gunther (MS) OLD BILL: S 2688 OF 2014 Add Alert Veto No. 293 of 2015 Voting
Text Versions: S 3440-A, S 3440
VETO MESSAGE - No. 293
TO THE SENATE:
I am returning herewith, without my approval, the following bill:
Senate Bill Number 3440-A, entitled:
"AN ACT to amend the agriculture and markets law, in relation to
dogs engaged in hunting or training"
NOT APPROVED
This bill would amend the Agriculture and Markets Law (AML) Section
122 to provide that, under certain circumstances, a dog engaged in hunt-
ing activities would not be deemed to be "running at large."
My administration is committed to supporting our State's sportsmen,
including those who hunt with dogs. However, law enforcement officials
often receive complaints from property owners regarding hunting dogs
that cross their land without consent. Unlike human hunters, dogs and
the game they chase rarely hue to property lines, often crossing over in
chase of their quarry to the dislike of property owners. This bill would
complicate law enforcement's efforts to protect property owners' rights.
Moreover, local dog control officers and other local police agencies
would assume significantly broader oversight and enforcement responsi-
bilities under this bill. Dogs may be miles from their owners and a law
enforcement officer would be hard-pressed to reasonably distinguish
between a dog "running at large" from a dog engaged in hunting or field
work without the owner's assistance. This uncertainty would make it very
difficult to protect the public and wildlife from dogs truly running
with no supervision or control. Accordingly, I am therefore constrained
to veto this bill.
The bill is disapproved. (signed) ANDREW M. CUOMO