BILL ANALYSIS
AB 241
Page 1
Date of Hearing: April 14, 2009
Counsel: Kathleen Ragan
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SAFETY
Jose Solorio, Chair
AB 241 (Nava) - As Amended: April 13, 2009
SUMMARY : Makes it a misdemeanor for an individual or business
that buys or sells dogs or cats to have more than a combined
total of 50 unsterilized dogs and cats, as specified.
Specifically, this bill :
1)Provides that no person shall own, possess, or otherwise have
charge or custody of more than a combined total of 50
unsterilized dogs and cats at any time for purposes of
breeding or raising such dogs and cats for sale as pets or for
the purposes of producing offspring from such dogs and cats
for sale as pets.
2)States that an individual or business that must reduce the
number of intact dogs or cats in order to comply with this
section shall spay or neuter the excess animals or sell,
transfer, or relinquish the excess animals within 30 days of
notification by authorities.
3)States that if necessary, any euthanasia procedures shall be
performed by a licensed California veterinarian.
4)Provides that a peace officer, humane society officer, or
animal control officer may lawfully take possession of an
animal kept in violation of this section when necessary to
protect the health or safety of the animal or the health or
safety of others. Requires an officer that seizes an animal
under this subdivision to provide the owner of the animal with
the opportunity for a post-seizure hearing, as specified.
5)States that this section does not apply to a publicly owned
animal control facility or animal shelter; to a veterinary
facility, a retail pet store or a research institution.
EXISTING LAW :
AB 241
Page 2
1)Makes it a misdemeanor to permit an animal to be in any
building, enclosure, street, lot, or judicial district without
proper care and attention. States that any peace officer,
humane society officer, or animal control officer shall take
possession of the stray or abandoned animal and shall provide
proper care and treatment for the animal until the animal is
deemed to be in a suitable condition to be returned to the
owner. Provides that when the officer has reasonable grounds
to believe that very prompt action is required to protect the
health or safety of the animal, the officer shall immediately
seize the animal and comply with specified opportunity for a
pre-seizure or post-seizure hearing, as specified, to
determine the validity of a seizure or impoundment of the
animal(s). [Penal Code Section 597.1(a).]
2)Provides that the animal's failure to request to attend, or to
attend a scheduled hearing shall result in a forfeiture of the
animal(s) and the right to challenge the costs of the
owner(s)' liability for any costs incurred. [Penal Code
Section 597.1(f).]
3)Provides that where the need for the immediate seizure of the
animal is not present and prior to the commencement of any
criminal proceedings, the agency shall provide the owner or
keeper of the animal with the opportunity for a hearing prior
to the seizure of the animal, if ascertainable after
reasonable investigation. [Penal Code Section 597.1(f).]
4)States that it is the policy of California that no adoptable
animal should be euthanized if it can be adopted into a
suitable home. Provides that adoptable animals include only
those animals eight weeks of age or older that, at or
subsequent to the time the animal is impounded have manifested
no sign of behavioral or temperamental defect that could pose
a health or safety risk or otherwise make the animal
unsuitable for placement as a pet, and have manifested no sign
of disease, injury, congenital or hereditary condition that
adversely affects the health of the animal or that is likely
to adversely affect the health of the animal in the future.
[Penal Code Section 599d(a).]
5)Further states that it is the policy of California that no
treatable animal should be euthanized. States that a
treatable animal includes any animal that is not adoptable but
that could become adoptable with reasonable efforts. [Penal
AB 241
Page 3
Code Section 599d(b).]
6)Requires a notice with specified information to be posted to a
conspicuous place where the animal was situated stating the
grounds for believing the animal should be seized. [Penal
Code Section 597.1(g)(1).]
7)Requires the notice to state that the cost of caring for and
treating the animal is a lien on the animal and that any
animal shall not be returned to the owner until the charged
are paid. [Penal Code Section 597(g)(1).]
FISCAL EFFECT : Unknown
COMMENTS :
1)Author's Statement : According to the author, "A 'puppy mill'
is a large-scale commercial breeding facility that
mass-produces puppies for sale.' The World Animal Foundation
explains that 'puppy mill kennels usually consist of small
wood and wire-mesh cages, or even empty crates or trailer
cabs, all kept outdoors, where female dogs are bred
continuously, with no rest between heat cycles. The mothers
and their litters often suffer from malnutrition, exposure,
and lack of veterinary care.
"Continuous breeding takes its toll on the females; they are
killed at about age six or seven when their bodies give out,
and they can no longer produce enough litters. The puppies
are taken from their mothers at the age of four to eight
weeks, and sold to brokers who pack them into crates for
transport and resale to pet shops. Puppies being shipped from
mill to broker to pet shop can cover hundreds of miles by
pickup truck, tractor trailer, and/or plane, often without
adequate food, water, ventilation, or shelter.
"Between unsanitary conditions at puppy mills and poor
conditions in transport, only half of the dogs bred at mills
survive to make it to market. Of those that eventually do
make it to stores, thousands of puppies each year are often
sold to 'impulse buyers' and ultimately end up in shelters.
Nearly one million dogs and cats land in California shelters
every year, of whom approximately one-half are ultimately
euthanized.
AB 241
Page 4
"A criminal bust of a single puppy mill can yield massive
expenses to the state and local jurisdictions due to the cost
of shelter, food, and veterinary care. A puppy mill bust last
year in which 249 animals were rescued in Buxton, Maine cost
the state $440,000. Humane organizations in the region raised
approximately $70,000 in additional funds to assist with the
rescue operation.
"AB 241 will curb pet overpopulation, eliminate mass breeding
efforts, and save state and local jurisdictions vital dollars
during our ongoing economic crisis."
2)Background : According to background information supplied by
the author, "The U.S. Department of Agriculture is tasked with
monitoring and inspecting kennels to ensure that they are not
violating the standards of the Animal Welfare Act (AWA.)
Unfortunately, kennel inspections are a low priority. In the
U.S. there are more than 1000 research facilities, more than
2,800 exhibitors, and 4,500 dealers that are supposed to be
inspected each year. There are three Animal and Plant Health
Inspection Service sector offices with a total of
approximately 70 veterinary inspectors who are supposed to
inspect, unannounced, the various types of facilities covered
by the AWA. This means that 70 inspectors are expected to
cover more than 8,300 facilities nationwide.
"Two other states - Louisiana and Virginia - have laws that cap
the number of animals a breeder mazy maintain. Twenty-nine
other states are also currently considering animal cap
legislation."
3)Other Facts Provided by the Sponsor : According to other
background information provided by the author:
a) The U.S. Department of Agriculture is tasked with
monitoring and inspecting kennels to ensure that they are
not violating the AWA standards. Unfortunately, kennel
inspections are a low priority. In the U.S. there are more
than 1,000 research facilities, more than 2,800 exhibitors
and 4,500 dealers that are supposed to be inspected each
year. There are three Animal and Plant Health Inspection
Service sector offices with a total of a proximately 770
veterinary inspectors who are supposed to inspect,
unannounced, the various types of facilities covered by the
AWA. This means that 70 Inspectors are expected to cover
AB 241
Page 5
more than 8,300 facilities nationwide annually.
"Two other states - Louisiana and Virginia - have laws that
cap the number of animals a breeder may maintain.
Twenty-nine other states are also currently considering
animal cap legislation.
b) According to the sponsor, the U.S. Humane Society of the
United States, "AB 241 addresses the problems puppy mills
create by limiting the number of intact cats or dogs a
seller can maintain. By limiting the number of animals who
can produce, this legislation will improve enforcement of
existing state law and enable animal control to more
effectively and efficiently deal with complaints about dogs
and cats living in squalid conditions and receiving
inadequate care. This legislation also addresses pet
overpopulation and the stress that large-scale breeders
place on animal shelters and our communities.
4)Arguments in Support :
a) According to the Humane Society of the United States ,
"AB 241 addresses the problems puppy mills create by
limiting the number of intact cats or dogs a seller can
maintain. By limiting the number of animals who can
reproduce, this legislation will improve enforcement of
existing state law and enable animal control to more
effectively and efficiently deal with complaints about dogs
and cats living in squalid conditions and receiving
inadequate care. This legislation also addresses pet
overpopulation and the stress that large-scale breeders
place on animal shelters and our communities."
b) According to the San Diego Animal Advocates , "[w]e have
seen the cruel consequences and the huge financial costs to
taxpayers of pet overpopulation. Puppy mills and kitten
mills are not only a huge part of that problem but are
inherently cruel in their practices. AB 241 is an
important tool to curb this ugly business and stop the
suffering of innocent animals."
c) According to Last Chance for Animals , "Although the U.S.
Department of Agriculture licenses and inspects large scale
breeding operations, the current laws are insufficient in
addressing the pet overpopulation problem that plagues this
AB 241
Page 6
country. If implemented, AB 241 will help curb pet
overpopulation, prevent animal cruelty and save taxpayer
money by reducing the number of cats and dogs euthanized in
local shelters. The law will reach these goals by limiting
the number of intact cats and dogs a breeder may maintain
to 50. By limiting the number of animals allowed in a
breeding situation, AB 241 makes the enforcement of state
animal welfare laws possible and efficient."
d) According to Born Free , "Many animals sold in pet shops
have been bred in mills - outfits where animals are
mass-produced in often appalling conditions. Puppy mills
are most commonly known; they are breeding facilities that
produce purebred puppies or trendy breed puppies such as
the 'cockapoo' (cocker spaniel and poodle mix) in large
numbers. The puppies are sold either directly to the
public via the Internet, newspaper ads, at the mill itself,
or are sold to brokers and pet shops across the country.
"The documented problems of puppy mills include
over-breeding, inbreeding, minimal veterinary care,
overcrowding of cages, poor quality of food and shelter,
lack of socialization with humans, and the killing of
unwanted puppies or adult animals that can no longer
reproduce.
"In spite of these awful conditions as well as the millions
of dogs put to death each year for lack of a home at local
animal shelters, puppy mills continue to churn out puppies.
By placing a cap in the number of animals that can be kept
at a facility, AB 241 will help to improve conditions at
these commercial breeding facilities, thereby helping
animals and protecting consumers."
e) According to Pet Overpopulation Task Force , "In the year
2008, the City of Stockton Animal Shelter took in 6,430
dogs and 6,547 cats. These numbers include puppies and
kittens. Of the 12,997 dogs and cats taken in at our
shelter, 3,868 and 5,837 cats were euthanized. The
opponents of this bill will tell you that most of the dogs
and cats killed at shelters are feral and not suitable for
adoption. This simply is not true. Many of these animals
were healthy and docile but there simply were not enough
homes for them. [I]t is time to look at and address the
facts of the pet overpopulation crisis and stop listening
AB 241
Page 7
to special interest groups that are selfishly protecting
their personal interests at the expense of mixed-breed
animals that have the misfortune of being born in a state
that is willing to spend a quarter of a billion dollars a
year to destroy unwanted animals."
5)Arguments in Opposition :
a) According to PetPAC , "While owning 50 intact dogs seems
excessive, there are a number of toy and small breeds that
rarely breed large numbers in their litters. In many
instances, not all intact dogs are bred each year. This
bill makes it a misdemeanor if one violates this provision.
It allows the officer to investigate books and records . .
. and allows the officer to confiscate animals.
"Because this is a criminal investigation, PetPAC feels this
section may be unconstitutional under self incrimination
and the 5th Amendment Sections of the United States
Constitution. This bill may even violate illegal search
and seizure laws as well as Miranda warnings under statutes
of the State of California."
b) According to the Animal Council , "While this bill may be
intended to criminalize puppy mills and animal hoarding,
the proposed offense is only based on a person owning,
possessing, controlling or otherwise having charge or
custody of more than a combined total of 50 unsterilized
dogs and cats at any time used for purposes of breeding or
raising such dogs or cats for sale as pets, or for the
purposes of producing offspring from such dogs or cats for
sale as pets. Does this mean that all 50 must have
actually been bred and produced offspring or that they are
unsterilized and therefore potentially usable to do so? If
the latter, then there is no maturity threshold so that
younger animals being kept for evaluation as breeding stock
or even awaiting placement as pets would be excluded from
this cap.
"In fact, commercial breeding of dogs based on a business
model requires limiting mature animals kept and selling
offspring at wholesale to contain economic risk of the cost
of carrying 'inventory' beyond the minimum saleable age.
This requires a USDA license and is rare in California for
reasons not limited to cost of real estate, transportation
AB 241
Page 8
and labor. Hoarding is not merely keeping a large number
of animals but lacking the combined means - financial,
physical, managerial or psychological to care for them
adequately regardless of whether breeding is involved.
"2009 is the first time we have ever seen legislative
proposals to regulate dog or cat owners based on a cap of
unaltered animals, so this is a novel and untried concept,
particularly if applied to economically viable businesses
conducted under satisfactory husbandry standards. Would we
limit dairies the number of cows or factories the number of
producing machines? No, because there are other ways to
regulate business as to safety and quality standards. As
to animals, California already has such statutes in
addition to many local ordinances. AB 241 would create an
unworkable, difficult to ascertain standard for a criminal
offense that is not rationally linked to criminal activity
or conduct of an economically viable business."
c) According to California Responsible Pet Owners
Coalition , "AB 241 is vague in intent, definition and
application. It seeks to create a new misdemeanor and
criminal offense prohibiting anyone who buys or sells dogs
or cats from owning, possessing, controlling or otherwise
having charge or custody of more than a combined total of
50 intact dogs and/or cats. The vagaries of the bill's
language opens the door to potential abuse of power,
invasive investigation, and arbitrary enforcement.
"By adding to the Penal Code as proposed, AB 241 is taking an
inappropriate approach to attempt to address issues of care
and husbandry. This proposal mandates new regulations to
state and/or local agencies yet denies reimbursement by the
state for implementation.
"Limit laws like the 50-dog limit contained in AB 241 are
based on arbitrary numbers and have been found to be
unenforceable as well as vulnerable to court challenges.
"Responsible pet and hobby breeders should be treated as
partners in helping to improve kennel standards and to
eliminate negligent breeders. Instead, this bill threatens
to alienate the very community that can help most.
"What is needed is appropriate enforcement of existing
AB 241
Page 9
cruelty and nuisance laws to crack down on those who
disobey the law, not more regulation for reasonable
law-abiding citizens."
d) According to the Cat Fanciers' Association, Inc., (CFA),
"This criminal bill is based on a cap on owning 50
unaltered cats. It is virtually impossible to breed
pedigreed cats as an economically viable business; i.e., a
'kitty mill' so this bill would more likely ensnare
citizens trying to care for unaltered feral or neighborhood
cats, criminalizing a labor of love. Capping unaltered
animals is a new policy concept and the likelihood of
lowering a cap will be a liability to both our constituent
hobby breeders as well as community cat caretakers.
Finally, creating a new misdemeanor crime adds unfunded
costs to the criminal justice system without offsetting
benefits.
"CFA is a non-profit organization founded in 1906. Part of
CFA's mission is to enhance the well-being of all cats.
CFA participants, who breed and show pedigreed cats, are
active in cat health promotion, cat breed rescue, shelter
support and other animal related programs throughout the
world."
e) According to the German Shepherd Dog Club of America ,
"AB 241, the Responsible Breeder Act of 2009 is attempting
to bypass the inherent financial problems by adding it to
the Penal Code. Nevertheless, this does mandate new
regulations to a state or local agency, probable budget
shortfalls and future requests for reimbursement by the
state.
"AB 241 creates a new misdemeanor offense prohibiting anyone
who buys or sells dogs or cats from owning, possessing,
controlling or otherwise having charge or custody of more
than a combined total of 50 dogs and cats with intact
sexual organs. This would incur abuse of power, invasive
investigation and arbitrary enforcement. The bill is vague
in intent and in definition.
"Limit laws, like the 50-dog limit contained in AB 241 are
based on an arbitrary number and have been found to be
unenforceable and vulnerable to court challenges.
AB 241
Page 10
"Responsible breeders should be treated as partners in
helping to improve kennel standards and eliminate negligent
breeders, but this bill threatens to alienate the very
community that can be of the most help.
"What is needed is greater enforcement of existing cruelty
and nuisance laws to find those who disobey the law, not
more regulation for law-abiding citizens. Please be fair
and thoughtful as you consider this bill."
f) Peggy Ruchter states "this bill omits to address the age
of such animals. Consequently, an owner of a boarding and
training kennel which nay have charge or custody of 30
adult animals could also have one litter of 14 puppies
under one week of age and one litter of 10 kittens and be
in violation of this law. A training facility for dogs
such as military working dogs or service dogs would also be
in violation. Rescues funded other than through the public
would be in violation. This has the unintended penalty for
those whose animals are not contributing to shelter
populations and there is no benefit to the public in so
restricting them.
"[O]ne has to wonder if the intent is to simply force all
ownership of intact animals to either Government-run
shelters or commercial Pet stores who obtain their animals
from out of state . . . . "
g) Oneta Cox states, "This week a TV news report showed
about 2,000 people standing in front of the Capitol
picketing against cuts to education and school funding
across the State. And State Legislators are proposing law
after law about . . . whether cats and dogs get to keep
their sexual organs?"
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
American Society for the Protection of
Cruelty Against Animals (Co-Sponsor)
Humane Society of the United States (Co-Sponsor)
Social Compassion in Legislation (Co-Sponsor)
American Kennel Club
Born Free
AB 241
Page 11
California Peace Officers' Association
California Police Chiefs Association
Compassion for Animals
Henry T. Perea, Council Member,
7th District, City of Fresno
Humane Society Veterinary Medical Association
Last Chance for Animals
Madera County Animal Services
PawPAC
Pet Care Foundation
Pet Overpopulation Task Force of Stockton
Placer County Animal Shelter
San Diego Animal Advocates
San Diego Animal Advocates
Shasta Animal Welfare Foundation
Stockton Police Department
United Animal Nations
14 private individuals
Opposition
American Kennel Club
Animal Council
California Federation of Dog Clubs
Cat Fanciers' Association
Feline Friends International
German Shepherd Dog Club of America
Golden Retriever Club of Greater
Los Angeles
Miniature Schnauzer Club of
Northern California
PetPAC
We the People for Pets
United States Society for the Prevention
of Cruelty to Others
Five private individuals
Analysis Prepared by : Kathleen Ragan / PUB. S. / (916)
319-3744