BILL ANALYSIS
AB 1857
Page 1
Date of Hearing: March 23, 2004
Counsel: Kathleen Ragan
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SAFETY
Mark Leno, Chair
AB 1857 (Koretz) - As Introduced: February 2, 2004
SUMMARY : Makes it a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment in
a county jail for a period not to exceed one year; by a fine of
$10,000; or by both to declaw any cat that is a member of an
exotic or native wild cat species. Specifically, this bill :
1)Provides that no person may perform, procure or arrange for
the performance of surgical claw removal on an exotic or
native wild cat, and shall not otherwise alter the cat's claws
or paws to prevent his or her normal function.
2)States that this prohibition does not apply to a procedure
performed solely for a therapeutic purpose.
3)Defines "declawing" and "onychectomy" as any surgical
procedure in which a portion of the animal's paw is amputated
in order to remove the animal's claws.
4)States that "tendenectomy" is a procedure in which the tendons
to an animal's limbs, paws, or toes are cut or modified so
that the claws cannot be extended.
5)Provides that "exotic or native wild cat species" includes all
members of the taxonomic family Felidae, except domestic cats
(Felis catus or Felis domesticus) or hybrids of wild and
domestic cats that are greater than three generations removed
from an exotic or native cat.
6)States that "exotic or native wild cat species" include, but
are not limited, to lions, tigers, cougars, leopards, lynxes,
bobcats, caracals, ocelots, margays, servals, cheetahs, snow
leopards, clouded leopards, jungle cats, leopard cats and
jaguars, or any hybrid thereof.
7)Defines "therapeutic purpose" as for the purpose of addressing
an existing or recurring infection, disease, injury, or
AB 1857
Page 2
abnormal condition in the claw that jeopardizes the cat's
health, where addressing the infection, disease, injury or
abnormal condition is a medical necessity.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Provides that, with certain exceptions, every person who
maliciously and intentionally maims, mutilates, tortures,
wounds, or kills a living animal is guilty of an alternate
felony/misdemeanor, punishable by imprisonment in a state
prison or a county jail; or by a fine of $20,000; or by both.
[Penal Code Section 597(a).]
2)Prohibits cruelty to animals, as specified. (Penal Code
Sections 597 through 599.)
3)States that it is a misdemeanor to cut the solid part of the
tail of any horse in the operation known as "docking" or in
any other operation performed for the purpose of shortening
the tail of any horse in California. (Penal Code Section
597n.)
4)Regulates the practice of veterinary medicine under the
Veterinary Medicine Practice Act. (Business and Professions
Code Section 4811 through 4831.)
5)States that a person practices veterinary medicine when he or
she performs a surgical or dental operation upon an animal,
among other things. [Business and Professions Code Section
4826(d).]
6)Regulates the care and hygiene standards for veterinary
offices, including operating rooms. (16 C.C.R. Section 2030.)
FISCAL EFFECT : Unknown
COMMENTS :
1)Author's Statement : According to the author, "The practice of
declawing is viewed by many veterinarians and animal experts
as an act of cruelty. Most Californians who have declawed
their cat, including animal lovers, have no idea what they put
their pet through. Declawing literally involves amputating
part of the cat's paws and causes pain and discomfort. Most
people do not realize that a portion of the bone - not just
AB 1857
Page 3
nail - is removed. It is comparable to cutting off part of
the human finger at the last joint.
"Contrary to most people's idea of declawing, the surgery
involves severing not just the claws but bone, ligaments, and
tendons. Complications of this amputation can be excruciating
pain, damage to the radial nerve, hemorrhage, bone chips that
prevent healing, painful regrowth of the deformed claw inside
of the paw, and chronic back and joint pain as shoulder, leg
and back muscles weaken. Many cats also suffer a loss of
balance since they can no longer achieve a secure foothold on
their stumps.
"Declawing is a cruel and inhumane procedure that is absolutely
unnecessary. Instead, veterinarians should work to educate
cat owners about the various alternatives that are available.
"Declawed cats can and do suffer behavioral disorders, such as
not using the litter box due to discomfort in their feet and
may use the rest of the house as their litter box. They also
have trouble jumping and landing; and in some severe cases,
both domestic and wild cats have become lame and even
paralyzed. Cats' first defense mechanisms are their claws;
when these are gone, cats bite.
"In reality, a declawed cat is actually a clubfooted animal. A
declawed cat cannot walk normally but must forever move with
his or her weight back on the rear of his or her pads.
Posture is irrevocably altered and gone is the easeful gait
that is his or her birthright. Declawed cats are 75%
defenseless and live in a constant state of stress which can
effect their health and make them more prone to disease. Cats
use their claws as a means of communication, much like we use
our voices. A declawed cat is much like a person without a
larynx."
2)Who Owns These Cats and Where Do They Live ? According to
background information supplied by the author, declawed,
native and exotic wild cats are owned by animal sanctuaries,
private zoos, individuals with working animals (e.g., those
used in entertainment), wildlife educational organizations,
and private parties.
There are dozens of sanctuaries in California, such as Wildlife
Waystaytion, Shambala, and Nature of Wildworks. In general,
AB 1857
Page 4
the declawed animals who live there were declawed by
individual owners. Many arrive at the sanctuaries after they
were confiscated as illegal pets by regulatory or enforcement
agencies, such as the Department of Fish and Game.
Many or most large sanctuaries, such as those named above, do
not declaw cats. However, many of the smaller, less
experienced ones will declaw and so will the small collections
of animals whose owners have wild animals available for school
educational programs, as well as birthdays and bar mitzvahs.
According to the author's background information, "The cats are
declawed with the intention that they will be made safer to
handle. The experience of the PAW project is that declawing
is often done routinely and without regard to consequences.
Several owners of small animal collections were not even aware
that declawing involved amputation of the terminal bone of
each toe. If declawing is done to 'disarm' a big cat, it
should be obvious that the teeth are a bigger threat to people
than the claws. A perfect example of this is the Roy Horn
incident. The opinion of many animal handlers is that
declawed cats, deprived of their primary means of defense, are
more likely to bite if provoked."
3)The Position of the Journal of American Veterinary Medicine
Association (AVMA) : The January 2004 issue of the Journal of
the American Veterinary Medicine reported that the AVMA has
approved a position statement that "opposes declawing of
captive exotic and other wild indigenous cats for non-medical
reasons." According to the Journal, the AVMA's Animal Welfare
Committee developed the statement with input from the American
Association of Zoo Veterinarians and American Association of
Wildlife Veterinarians. The Journal states that "because of
their size, weight, and environment, exotic and wild cats
commonly experience adverse effects when onychectomy is
performed. Therefore, the Welfare Committee believes the
procedure is ill advised for these cats unless required for
medical reasons."
4)Is This Bill Necessary Because of a Widespread Problem ?
According to background information supplied by the author,
"There are hundreds, and probably well over one thousand,
declawed wild cats in captivity in California. Studies
suggest that many, if not all, of these animals will develop
complications from declawing, resulting in pain and/or
AB 1857
Page 5
shortened life expectancy.
"Small sanctuaries come and go, on average existing for just a
few years. As a result, there are many people involved with
these sanctuaries who have little experience with wild cats.
The PAW Project has found that many of these individuals have
no idea of the significant complications that can result from
declawing. Although they observe lameness in these cats, they
often incorrectly attribute it to arthritis or other disease.
"Even if the intentions of the owners are not malicious,
declawing of big cats is cruel and unnnecessary. A ban on
declawing will reduce the needless suffering of captive
felines in California and will educate the owners of the cats
about the consequences of declawing.
"The cost of declawing to the state is probably negligible, but
the cost to California citizens to treat the paws of a single
declawed wild cat can cost from $3,000 to $6,000 depending on
whether only the front paws or all four paws have been
declawed. A conservative estimate is that it would require $4
million to repair the paws of all the declawed cats in
California-money that could be better used to take care of
other needs of animals. Often the original owners of the
cats (even if they were 'working' cats) do not incur these
costs, since the cats often end up in nonprofit sanctuaries
that depend on private donations.
"In addition, since only about one-half of the vets in
California are members of the AVMA (the other one-half seem to
be CVMA), it is important to have this policy codified in
statute to avoid inconsistencies in veterinary medicine in
California."
5)De-clawing Is Illegal, or Performed Only Under Extreme
Circumstances, in Many Countries. According to
declawing.com, a website maintained by a veterinarian, the
following is a list of countries in which de-clawing cats is
either illegal or considered extremely inhumane and only
performed under extreme circumstances. The prohibition on
de-clawing appears to apply to all cats in:
(a) England; (b) Scotland; (c) Wales; (d) Italy; (e)
France; (f) Germany; (g) Austria; (h) Switzerland; (i)
AB 1857
Page 6
Norway; (j) Sweden; (k) Netherlands; (l) Northern Ireland;
(m) Ireland; (n) Denmark; (o) Finland; (p) Slovenia; (q)
Portugal; (r) Belgium; (s) Brazil; (t) Australia; (u) New
Zealand; (v) Yugoslavia; (w) Japan.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
Action for Animals
Actors and Others for Animals
American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (ASPC)
Animal Council
Animal Kingdom Veterinary Hospital
Animal Protection Institute
Association of Veterinarians for Animal Rights
California Federation for Animal Legislation
California Lobby for Animal Welfare
California Wildlife Center
Cat Fanciers' Association
Contra Costa Humane Society
Doris Day Animal League
Friends of Roman Cats
Friends of the Folsom Zoo, Inc.
Fund for Animals, Inc.
Homeowners Financial Plus
Humane Society of the United States
In Defense of Animals
Jonathan Goodson Productions
Last Chance for Animals
Los Angeles Lawyers for Animals
PAW Project
People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA)
Rescue Angels, Inc.
Rescue House
Thunderhawk Big Cat Rescue
United Animal Nations
48 Private Individuals
Opposition
The Animal Council
Analysis Prepared by : Kathleen Ragan / PUB. S. / (916)
AB 1857
Page 7
319-3744