Part of the Bay Area News Group

California Animal Legislation for 2008

By Gary Bogue
Tuesday, March 4th, 2008 at 7:05 am in Animal Laws, Animal protection legislation.

Animal bills for 2008 as of March 3

Many of the following bills have not yet been assigned to committee or set for hearing. More bills may be discovered. We’ll let you know if they are.

This information has been compiled by Virginia Handley of Paw PAC, PO Box 475012, San Francisco, CA 94147, 415-646-0622. See their Web site, http://www.pawpac.org, write or call for a copy of the 2007 Voting Chart.

To see actual copies of these bills go to http://www.leginfo.ca.gov

THE BILLS:

AB 1634 by Assemblyman Lloyd Levine re: Spay/Neuter. SUPPORT.
Requires six month old dogs/cats to be spayed/neutered. Exempts show and hunting dogs, research, law enforcement, search/rescue, service dogs, dogs/cats too old or sick. Breeders have to have permits, but allows one dog litter for one year.
Next Hearing: Senate Local Government. Maybe April.
Write: Senator Gloria Negrete-McCloud, Chairwoman. Tell her that pet overpopulation costs cities/counties millions of dollars and hundreds of thousands of animal lives.

AB 2098 by Assemblyman Paul Krekorian re: Downed Animals. SUPPORT.
Strengthens the existing law prohibiting auctions and state inspected slaughterhouses from accepting or dragging downed animals.

AB 2233 by Assemblyman Bill Maze re: Dogs in Cars.
Prohibits having a dog, or any animal, in your lap while driving.

AB 2281 by Assemblyman Pedro Nava re: Dog Fighting. SUPPORT.
Strengthens existing penalty for attending a dog fight from a misdemeanor to a felony.

AB 2291 by Assemblyman Tony Mendoza re: Spay/Neuter. SUPPORT.
Adds a check off on state income tax forms to finance low cost spay/neuter programs.

AB 2602 by Assemblyman Cameron Smyth re: Hunting. SUPPORT.
Declares the intention of the Legislature to prohibit schools from funding or supporting the hunting or trapping of wildlife.

AB 2785 by Assemblyman Ira Ruskin re: Wildlife Corridors. SUPPORT.
Requires the Wildlife Conservation Board to designate and protect wildlife corridors. AB 828 of 2007 on the same subject was vetoed.

AB 2911 by Assemblywoman Lois Wolk re: Oil Spills. SUPPORT.
Among many provisions, strengthens protection against oil spills (as does AB 1806 and AB 2912, not listed in this alert) and provides for the better use of volunteers to rehabilitate wildlife.
Hearing: Assembly Water, Parks and Wildlife. No date set.
Write: Assemblywoman Lois Wolk, Chairwoman. Thank her for introducing AB 2911. Wildlife rehabilitation is dependent on the volunteers to act quickly in emergencies.

SB 685 by Senator Leland Yee re: Pet Trusts. SUPPORT.
Strengthens pet trusts for animals in wills to provide for their care and provide oversight of the money. Mandates care for animals for their lifetime even if over 21 years, such as parrots and horses.
Next Hearing: Assembly Judiciary. No date set.
Write: Assemblyman Dave Jones, Chairman. Tell him animals deserve the care and protection their people provided for them in their wills.

SB 1121 by Senator Carole Migden re: Cloned Animals. SUPPORT.
Requires animal products from cloned animals be labeled. SB 63 of 2007 on the same subject was vetoed.
Next Hearing: Senate Health. No date set.
Write: Senator Sheila Kuehl, Chairwoman. Tell her that consumers/public have a right to know the origins of animals in the agriculture industry.

State Budget re: Fish and Game Wardens, Shelter Mandates. OPPOSE.
Among many cutbacks, the budget reduces the number of Fish & Game wardens. Also, the State Analyst has recommended that the unfunded state mandates (longer holding periods, shelter vet care) of the Hayden law be removed which have already cost the State well over $100 million.
Write: Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger. Tell him our wildlife is dependent on the enforcement of laws against poaching and protection of habitat. Wardens are already understaffed and underpaid. Also, tell him that animals in shelters need veterinary care and the opportunity to be reclaimed or adopted.

INITIATIVES

“California Prevention of Farm Animal Cruelty Act.” Mandates pregnant pigs, veal calves, and egg laying birds (chickens, ducks, turkeys, geese, guinea fowl) have room to stand up, turn around, lie down and extend their limbs. Does not include dairy calves who replace dairy cows. Over 600,000 signatures have been gathered and the initiative will be on the November 2008 ballot. Info: http://www.humanecalifornia.org

“California Farm Animal Protection Act” (07-0058). Put in by the agriculture industry to counteract the Calif. Prevention of Farm Animal Cruelty Act. Mandates compliance with industry standards which are much lower than those in the California Prevention of Farm Animal Cruelty Act. It has not yet qualified for the ballot.

Sponsored by opponents of AB 1634 initiatives 07-0056, 07-0057, 07-0059, 07-0060, 07-0062, 07-0063 have been submitted to prevent any future legislation to require spay/neuter or micro-chipping. Declares animals are property under the Constitution. They have not yet qualified for the ballot.

Looks like it’s going to be a VERY interesting year of squabbling in Sacramento. /Gary

[You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.]

9 Responses to “California Animal Legislation for 2008”

  1. Pat in Antioch Says:

    A question rather than a comment Gary. What are your feelings concerning spay/neuter at such a young age? My Ember was about 4 months when she was spayed almost 15 years ago. My vet said we should, so I did. She has had no ill effects. I’ve read so many arguments against it though, that I’m just curious…..

    Pat in Antioch

  2. D Elisabeth Aymett Says:

    “Experience should teach us to be most on our guard to protect liberty when the government’s purposes are beneficent… The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well meaning but without understanding. ” Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis

    I include the above quote because it applies so well in the case of Mandatory Spay/Neuter laws.

    The proponents of Mandatory Spay/Neuter state that this policy will save money. However, everywhere this type of legislation has been tried, governments have experienced the opposite effect. Furthermore, the common sense test should be applied here. If a lowering of euthanasia rates will lead to a savings in the Animal Control budgets, why have we seen no evidence of it thus far? Euthanasia rates have been dropping steadily over the past 30 years. For instance, in California, rates are down by 59% over just the past 10 years (according to the State’s statistics), yet Animal Control costs continue to go up. The discrepancies in facts just don’t add up for the proponents of Mandatory Spay/Neuter.

    Mandatory Spay/Neuter is the most recent in a string of anti-dog legislation by the Animal Rights activists who seek to end the ownership of animals. It is an extremist agenda and an impractical one.

    And what will be accomplished with Mandatory Spay/Neuter? Puppy millers will increase their market share and the people looking for pets will be forced to buy from these unscrupulous producers of unhealthy and inferior dogs and cats. The influx of illegally smuggled puppies and kittens from Mexico will increase – yet another source of unhealthy pets for consumers left with nowhere else to turn because the ethical hobby breeder will have been outlawed by Mandatory Spay/Neuter, while puppy mills are provided the first exemption under that bill. The unintended consequence will be a windfall for puppy and kitten mills, thereby promoting these inhumane businesses.

    The proponents of early spay/neuter completely ignore the long-term health consequences for dogs from this surgery. Spaying/neutering at an extremely young age has been shown to increase the risks of bone cancer, certain heart cancers and skeletal injuries such as ACL and CCL ligament tears. Please feel free to check the veracity of that statement by reading the report found at this link: http://www.naiaonline.org/pdfs/LongTermHealthEffectsOfSpayNeuterInDogs.pdf

    In summary, Mandatory Spay/Neuter laws are unhealthy for pets, financially detrimental to the families who own pets and will be financially negative for any jurisdiction which passes such a law due to loss of revenue from the dog and cat shows. Mandatory Spay/Neuter laws are a bad bargain and you should not make it.

  3. D Elisabeth Aymett Says:

    try looking up the information on the negative effects of very early spay/neuter at the NAIA website naiaonline.org It includes increased incidents of incontinence, fear aggression, bone and heart cancers, and ACL and CCL injuries. Those pushing Mandatory Spay/Neuter don’t want these things known.

    The bill, as it is written, doesn’t provide for real exemptions for show dogs. I show dogs and know enough to know how impossible the standards are. Also, each county would be able to make their independent decisions about which “valid” dog registries (or cat registries) they will recognize. Most counties (including Contra Costa) don’t issue breeder permits, so that’s a myth. Which means, you have to breed enough to qualify for a federal permit, which means enough to qualify as a commercial breeder. THAT means that you can’t raise a litter in your home – all facilities have to be at least 200 yards from where people live. So, you get unsocialized puppies instead of pups raised in a loving hobby breeeder’s living room. Hobby breeders don’t make money as it is. They’ll just quit in California and your choice will be to get a pup from a puppy mill (you won’t realize it, but that’s where it’ll come from).

    Hobby breeders follow their pups for life, are there for you when you have questions, when your pup has a behavior problem, etc. Who will you call for your puppy mill pup? The shelter? Good luck to you then.

  4. Barbara Says:

    Re: the California Prevention of Farm Animal Cruelty Act, if anyone needs a little reference matter as to why this initiative should be supported, read “Slaughterhouse: The Shocking Story of Greed, Neglect, and Inhumane Treatment Inside the U.S. Meat Industry,” by Gail A. Eisnitz. Learn how our meat is processed today in this country.

    Ms. Eisnitz has pretty much awakened me to the taste varieties of lettuce.

  5. Gary Says:

    Hey, I thought I was the only one up typing on my computer at this beautiful hour!
    You want to explore the taste varieties of lettuce? Grow your own. /Gary

  6. Barbara Says:

    I’ve been a morning person for years. And, you’re right—it’s a beautiful time of day! (Of course, the day after the start of DST takes a little readjustment…).

    I tried “growing” a spring salad once using a friend’s theory regarding the cultivation of a Mesclun garden. My plan was to harvest a tasty selection of vegetables. Unfortunately, whatever it was that was fermenting made that portion of my yard smell like a site for hazardous waste.

    I definitely succeeded in keeping deer and aphids away. Cats, on the other hand, were in paradise. When I looked at fish emulsion, and other blends of vegetable fertilization, as alternative fragrances (for the garden), I knew that I had to destroy what apparently was turning into the equivalent of a chemical imbalance.

    Oddly enough, I don’t recall planting lettuce amongst this group of botanical infestation… Maybe I will try it again. I am now wiser. (Translation: I have a gardener.).

  7. Cara Favilla Says:

    Hello Gary,
    I just wanted to commend you for your support in the various animal legislations of 2008. As an avid animal lover myself, I believe it is very important for animals to receive legal protection for all of the cruelty and wrong-doings of our society.

    I am a student at De Anza College in Cupertino, CA. For our final project in our English class, we had to choose an active bill and track it’s progress. Being an animal rights supporter and a vegetarian for the last five years, I was very intrigued by AB 2098, the bill to protect nonambulatory animals. Like you, I support the bill, and believe animals in slaughterhouses need much more protection and care than they receive.

    I believe this bill should be passed, as animals do not deserve to live in pain while diseased and suffering. It is a small solace to know the animal will be euthanized or humanely killed (as if there is such a thing.)

    If it were up to me, slaughterhouses would not exist at all. I believe this bill is a small step in the right direction, and could hopefully open our societies eyes to the unspeakable amount of cruelty these animals endure.

    If you’d like more information on the meat industry, slaughterhouses, or to learn how to change your lifestyle to become more kind to animals, visit http://www.goveg.com

    Thank you,
    Cara Favilla

  8. fran reimer Says:

    Please rush me a fact sheet on raccoons destroying lawns. We have a regular visitor or more doing alot of damage. Thanks a million. Fran

  9. Amy Ralston Says:

    I am completely against AB 2233 legislating pet safety in the car.

    We don’t need more legislation for every single scenario in the world. Education is the best answer. If they want to put it into the DMV handbook, fine, but I don’t need someone to legislate how my dog will ride in my car. I’m a responsible person – my dog rides in the back in a bed I’ve made for her. As a responsible person, I’m sick of people like you telling me that I have to harness my dog because one in 2,000,000 people might have an accident because they are irresponsible.

Leave a Reply