Wisconsin’s “Windchill’s Law” Reintroduced

Posted by Stephanie Ulmer, Guest Blogger on March 9, 2012

Last year, “Windchill’s Law” was introduced in the Wisconsin Senate, but it fizzled as the legislative session ended. Named in honor of an abused colt, Northland’s NewsCenter reports that,

“the law proposes that ‘great bodily harm’ be added to the animal cruelty provision that covers intentional mutilation, disfigurement or death of an animal. The law would also clarify the abandonment statute, add a new definition to water, expand the number of years that a violator is banned from owning an animal from 5 to 10 years, and allow the court to order a psychological assessment, anger management counseling or psychological counseling for violators who are found guilty and sentenced.”

The colt, named Windchill, was found horribly malnourished while covered in icy snow in temperatures far below freezing. Unable to stand, Windchill died 20 days after authorities discovered the abused colt. The pair who was boarding Windchill was charged with animal negligence.

In a continued effort to strengthen animal abuse laws, State Representative Nick Milroy (D-South Range), with the help of State Representative Keith Ripp (R-Lodi), is trying to revive the bill during the current legislative session. Representative Milroy hopes that with bipartisanship support, Windchill’s Law will pass and Wisconsin’s animals will have the protection they so desperately deserve.


5 thoughts on “Wisconsin’s “Windchill’s Law” Reintroduced

  1. theresa armstrong says:

    This alaw should be country wide…..Go Windchill’s Law…

  2. G says:

    Adding the phrase “Great bodily harm” seems to give abusers a loophole. If they kick a dog and it lives without great bodily harm, is he any less abused?

  3. Juli DeJonghe says:

    I agree with the last post – animal abuse needs to be all inclusive of any type of behavior – whether it be one incident or ongoing – it needs to stop and those who are capable of this behavior need to be held accountable and monitored. I can’t even get my head around this incident with this poor colt Windchill. How does one get to that state of mind that they can allow such suffering? It sickens the soul.

  4. Ann Duffy says:

    Put the owners out in the freezing field with no food…that is my solution.

  5. Anonymous in Litigation says:

    a local veterinarian starved my dog for 9 days and still has the body, almost a year later, we are suing, however it is a very sad process… as I have not been able to conduct a necropsy (spolation of evidence) a time senitive surgery was not performed which was stated and pre paid for and they kept him in a paralytic coma so he had to breathe with a ventilator…. it was horrible to watch as this man with a license could do such harm. As we tried to save our doggie as other veterinarians suggested we transport a minor surgery (which they did not perform), he became completely paralyzed and we still do not know what happened. The vet would not let us transport him to get proper care. We are the 5th victim by the same place (1st under their new business name) and not the last i would presume but am not making allegations) I asked for help all over and we are in litigation still… the state has been investigating, any help on how to get the state to pick up criminal charges while they await the outcome of the civil case, which their motion to dismiss the unfair and deceptive trade practices act (count 1 of the claim) the judge denied! Yay! Someone sees truth! any thoughts?